The ongoing talks in Copenhagen have no doubt arrested the entire world’s attention on climate change.
To be honest, I was never much fascinated by such issues related to our environment. It was only in the past two years that I got acquainted with climate change issues within the business community that the interest developed.
From what I’ve observed so far, the real deal about climate change and what goes on in COP15 is more inclined toward political interest and economic driven among nations- the fittest survive and the weakest dies.
The real deal on climate change
For a start, there are still a lot of lively debates and controversies surrounding the claims that whether or not emitted greenhouse gases are strongly linked to human activities that are ultimately contributing to global warming.
I mean do only greenhouse gases contribute to global warming?
How is it that carbon emission which is generated by fossil fuels is to blame?
Why the push to resist the use of oil (fossil fuels) and to adopt alternative sources of clean energy?
For certain, the answer does not begin with saving our environment.
In my personal opinion, countries adopting alternative sources of clean energy is similar to what Singapore has achieved with NEWater. Now we no longer feel susceptible to our neighbour across the causeway whom we’re buying water from.
Unfortunately, unlike water, oil cannot be recycled or undergo reverse osmosis. Oil, and not water, powers the economy.
The ugly face of climate change
As one goes deeper into climate change issues, one can become delusional or feel hopeless about the human race especially on discovering the sort of evil that we are capable of.
For instance, it is no secret that the final war against Iraq by infiltrating Afghanistan is all about possessing oil fields and nothing about terrorism.
Terrorism was merely used as a bogeyman to rally public support for the invasion. And till now, no “weapons of mass destruction” have been uncovered in Iraq.
Hence, just as how any criminal case is investigated by considering the motive and sequences of events that transpired. This question begs to be answered: “Was 911 really a terrorist attack or was it an insider’s job?”
I know what I’m insinuating here might be highly contentious. But to me, it does present a stronger and more logical case for what has transpired in our global economy over the years.