The need to limit global warming as prevention of the effects of climate change

The need to reduce carbon emissions has become very urgent, given the level of global warming now reached the planet; evaluation, almost taken for granted, was made official by the body called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, following the results collected in 2007 and presented on 2 November in Copenhagen. This report should provide the scientific basis on which to develop the business plans of the internal states and therefore set the limits within which action during the international negotiations, which should take place in Paris in 2015, to reach a global agreement on emissions trading. The major concern is the continued occurrence of climate change relevant, able to create events that altered the flow of atmospheric phenomena, with serious social and economic impact of disasters due to global warming. The threshold should not be exceeded to avoid aggravating the tendency of natural disasters was estimated to increase by no more than two degrees Celsius in global temperatures, in excess of this figure is not considered possible to limit the effects of climate change, the change that has acquired a rate not much more controllable. Measures to support this limit, however, are dramatic: by 2050 the emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, greenhouse effect, will be decreased by 70%, to disappear completely by 2100. This need to imply the need to eliminate all but the extraction and use of fossil fuels, investing in alternative energy sources, improving energy efficiency by reducing waste and reduce global deforestation. These factors require, however, a considerable effort that goes in with the need to invest significant amounts of formerly gross domestic product of individual states quickly. The major obstacle to this requirement is represented by an apparent incompatibility with economic growth, the parameter that increasingly affects the lives of all the nations of the world. Despite the reassurances of Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Group, who said there are several solutions that can enable growth and economic development, balanced with the environment, without an overall change attitude towards the use of renewable energy and its means of production that use them, it does not seem possible to attain the objective of growth in global temperature below two degrees. However, it is also true that we are dealing with a process which concerns climate change, started to become irreversible and to create the future economic costs increasing, resulting in the need to intervene as early as possible to avoid costs both social and economic practically unsustainable. In the financial statements of pollution entering assessments also closely related to the costs involved, not just economic, but also social: the reasons of social equity, related to the fight against poverty, are intimately related to the impacts that climate change has on society and on least developed, which have to rely on its own resources for dealing with minors. Valga as an example the increase in the phenomenon of famine due to the desertification of large areas of Africa, which caused many victims of malnutrition and forced large numbers of people to leave their countries to undertake real exodus to other countries, generating significant social imbalances. If food security is already a problem, however unfortunately destined to grow, the water emergency, already present in various parts of the world, is likely to get worse, opening a new front in the global comparison also able to escalate into conflict. The signs that the planet we send are clear: rising sea levels, the reduction in the area of glaciers and changes in the spread of marine and terrestrial species indicates that the urgency of a change of direction is needed right away. There remain, however, to convince the industrialized countries and those of long standing, and those who have entered the world of mass production in recent times. Currently, beyond the statements of the facade, depletion of resources is governed only by the economic logic of short-term, in complete contrast to the climate scientists who argue over much longer periods, however, the speed of climate change and, above all, their effects are reducing the visual time between the two parties. The task of international diplomacy is to find a way to overcome this difference and try to match the timing of forecast, trying to stimulate growth models are fully compatible with environmental requirements, it is an enormous effort because the two need to appear to be inconsistent 'inside of a system which favors the increase of wealth at any cost. But the need to maintain economic development within certain well-defined standards is not only the demand of environmentalists, often seen as catastrophic off from the world, but it comes from scientists who have developed estimates of reliable scientific data on which the leaders of the world have responsible for no reason underestimate them at all.