And in the meantime?
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2025 3:17 am
Then there is the issue of climate change adaptation. Imagine a nation preparing for the worst, building dams, storm-proofing homes, moving entire populations out of risk areas. It is money invested in the future, not the present, and it is crucial. But there is a problem: historically, only a third of the money has gone to this purpose. Most of the money has been earmarked for mitigation, that is, to help countries stop polluting. Here, too, there is a paradox: the funding often goes to “profitable” projects, like solar power plants, because yes, even in climate disaster there are those who do business.
And now, let's get to the heart of the problem: there is not enough money. Estimates vary, but a recent study speaks of damages that could reach 580 billion dollars by 2030. Another buy phone number list study speaks of 400 billion. In short, we are facing an economic catastrophe as well as a climate one. And while the numbers multiply, the funds remain ridiculous compared to the scale of the crisis.
Then there’s the big question: Who will actually pay? Thirty years ago, the answer seemed clear: the developed nations, which have polluted the most and have benefited enormously from fossil fuels. But the landscape has changed since then. China, once seen as a “developing nation,” is now an economic powerhouse with a staggering carbon footprint. And the United States—not exactly known for its environmental generosity—would like China to contribute mandatorily, not just voluntarily.
While the powerful argue over who should pay for what, the climate doesn’t wait. It keeps changing. The storms keep hitting, the rivers keep flooding, and millions of people keep suffering. Perhaps instead of focusing o celand's economy grew faster than any other European nation and its workers reported greater well-being, less stress and a better work-life balance after the country cut its workweek from 40 to 36 hours, according to a study published Friday on the four-day workweek.
And now, let's get to the heart of the problem: there is not enough money. Estimates vary, but a recent study speaks of damages that could reach 580 billion dollars by 2030. Another buy phone number list study speaks of 400 billion. In short, we are facing an economic catastrophe as well as a climate one. And while the numbers multiply, the funds remain ridiculous compared to the scale of the crisis.
Then there’s the big question: Who will actually pay? Thirty years ago, the answer seemed clear: the developed nations, which have polluted the most and have benefited enormously from fossil fuels. But the landscape has changed since then. China, once seen as a “developing nation,” is now an economic powerhouse with a staggering carbon footprint. And the United States—not exactly known for its environmental generosity—would like China to contribute mandatorily, not just voluntarily.
While the powerful argue over who should pay for what, the climate doesn’t wait. It keeps changing. The storms keep hitting, the rivers keep flooding, and millions of people keep suffering. Perhaps instead of focusing o celand's economy grew faster than any other European nation and its workers reported greater well-being, less stress and a better work-life balance after the country cut its workweek from 40 to 36 hours, according to a study published Friday on the four-day workweek.