The climate crisis is followed by the collapse of many living systems in large areas of the earth. It is fitting that humanity acknowledges the damage done to humanity and the vital need to remedy its consequences
Today, when there is already awareness of warming and climate change, it is appropriate that humanity acknowledges the human damage caused to living systems and the vital need to correct the results of the damage.
Because humanity's impact on climate change is not only in warming to dangerous levels but also in threatening the living systems that depend on a stable climate, on top of that there are hundreds of years in which man plunders natural resources, so according to a draft report of the Biodiversity Convention. Today, human behavior leads to and continues to cause unprecedented loss and damage to biological diversity, When a million species are on the verge of extinction
Last year it turned out that Humanity has not achieved any of the goals set in the previous decade.
In order to overcome the lost decade and to save the natural environment, the United Nations has mapped out the steps that must be taken to preserve living systems, although there is a need to clarify the details, the danger is clear because the continued loss of biological diversity poses a danger to humanity, therefore there is an urgent need to change the approach and the way of acting of governments, a change that will be made in favor of the goal of life on earth,
The last report of the convention was approved and signed by 196 countries with the exception of Trump's USA whose representatives refused to sign.
The report is the result of the work of 60 experts from 26 countries. The conclusions are that it is possible to repair the damages, but for this, difficult measures and worldwide cooperation are needed. Since nature is an integrated and interconnected system, the goal of the convention is to define overall (holistic) goals. In order to succeed in stopping the deterioration of the state of nature, the report calls for the full cooperation of companies and governments, cross-border cooperation. The report concludes that there is a need for a combination of considerations and ambitions that will enable change and a transition to a good future for life on earth.
The authors of the report detail what is needed for success. First - all land and water areas must come under integrated planning where 30% of the land and sea areas will benefit from protection and management.
To this end, it is necessary to restore 20% of the damaged areas, to protect and restore the genetic diversity of wild animals, - to reduce the friction between people and wild animals, to ensure the collection and trade of wild animals in a sustainable manner, to prevent and reduce the introduction of foreign species and to sustainably manage species - Bar by indigenous communities.
I also need the authors of the report to go beyond terrestrial and marine agriculture using sustainable methods, to increase the green and blue areas in urban areas, to integrate the values of biological diversity in all policies of the planning and development processes, to make accessible all the information and alternatives related to reducing over-consumption and food waste. In removing incentives that encourage damage to biological diversity, in combining traditional information in planning and managing biological diversity and in setting national goals and presenting performance evaluations.
According to the authors of the report, in order to meet these goals, 200 billion dollars are needed each year, and in addition to this, there is a need to increase support for developing countries. To give a scale against the required amount, the authors of the report opposite present the American security budget which stands at 780 billion dollars or the amount of 560 billion dollars that US residents spend every year on clothes and 100 billion dollars on food for pets, hence the need to save The biological diversity that supports all of our life systems 200 billion dollars is a reasonable amount.
Despite all this, there are conservation bodies that criticize the report for not being radical and ambitious enough in the face of the disaster that is taking place, for example in the evaluation of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) it is stated that "the draft report lacks the urgency and ambition required to To reverse the process of biodiversity loss and to ensure a positive world for nature in the current decadeJ.
"Despite the congratulations on the draft, there is disappointment that the report does not reflect the necessary ambition to reverse the process that leads to the disaster."
"Another decade must not be lost, science clarifies the essential need for action to mitigate the susceptibility to future epidemics, to deal with climatic disasters and to ensure a prosperous and fair future for all"...
And in my holy way I will add that in order to succeed in reversing the trend: it is appropriate that instead of controlling the environment for the sake of the human population there should be control of the human population for the sake of the environment.
More of the topic in Hayadan:
3 תגובות
Lorem Ipossum, you probably didn't understand the point of the illustration.
Thank you very much for the article.
There is nothing more important for our future and our children than limiting the increase in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees at the same time as preserving biodiversity, the land, the oceans and the seas.
If we have filled nature with plastic but have not affected the climate, we should focus on cleaning nature from plastic and preventing the spread of more plastic, instead of creating a variety of new and disturbing problems on the non-existent topic of climate change (such as the elimination of large open and unspoiled living areas in favor of something that will become non-recyclable garbage in 15 years from the date of its operation such as solar collectors and bird grinders). If we do affect the climate it is better to adopt more ecological methods such as reactivating decommissioned nuclear power plants in California and Japan and other places, and building new ones. Nuclear power plants are much greener and more efficient in every sense than any other existing solution, and those currently under development will be cheaper, safer, more efficient and cleaner.
So what, "humanity has not achieved any of the goals set in the previous decade"? It is only because the dangers were not defined correctly, the goals were not formulated properly, the ways to solve them were broken and the implementation was disastrous and produced poverty and shortages among disadvantaged populations from the beginning and the results... it is better not to talk about them. In the end, we come to a lovely video on YouTube that shows how with cheap and simple means like sticking a plastic bottle full of water in the ceiling of a wretched tin in India or Africa, it is possible to lighten up this terrible abode of poverty a little. What we don't understand is that this measure is really an alibi for green environmental organizations on their own behalf to prevent economic development of the area and to claim that there is no need to supply them with electricity produced by "polluting means", because there is no need - they have light in the oven and these ecological measures "work".
To understand how all ecologists reach disastrous results, you should read the book "Apocalypse Never" by Michael Shellenberger, which was recently published in Hebrew. The author is a real activist for the environment and not just one of those who have always spewed signals of environmental adequacy before their eyes.
But only at the end of the article, in the very last sentence, do we get to the real motive behind this apocalyptic environmentalism: control of the population, ostensibly "for the sake of the environment". It must be assumed that if this was not the real goal, we would see more successful results from an ecological point of view.