The Burning Question summary

In 2009, world leaders finally agreed to try limiting global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) – a figure considered reasonably safe at the time. But recent events have shown that it simply isn’t enough.

Why not?

We’ve all heard that the natural reserves of fossil fuels are running low, but actually, there’s too much oil rather than too little – at least when we’re talking about climate change.

Why?

Most people believe that climate conferences and the new wave of green technologies will lead the way to a sustainable future.

Unfortunately, this may just be wishful thinking.

Have you ever asked yourself why most people don’t undertake drastic actions when the threat of climate change is so imminent?

One reason is that, due to climate change’s complexity, most people are struck by disbelief and confusion.

As we’ve seen, government pledges and green technology alone are not enough to solve the problem of climate change. It looks like the only way forward is to implement global constraints on carbon emissions – even though this would massively devalue existing fossil fuel supplies and infrastructures.

And drastic measures must be taken. In a 2011 study, researchers found that if we want a fair chance of staying within the 2-degree target, we need to annually reduce emissions by 5 to 6 percent starting in 2016 – a massive reduction.

So what can be done to counter the political influence of the fossil fuel industry?

One way is to stop spending on fossil fuel reserves and infrastructure, and divest – the opposite of invest – out of the oil industry.

So what can be done considering that voluntary pledges to reduce carbon emissions have proven ineffective?

Answer: countries have to be forced to respect the planet.

As mentioned before, one of the key factors for creating change is raising a global awareness of the issue. And, like every revolution, it starts with the individuals of a society – which means we all have to take part.

How?