Encyclopedia of Opinion
Question

What should we do about climate change?

We are in a climate crisis. People and natural systems around the world are feeling the impacts of a warming globe, from more intense heat waves, more intense storms, heavier rainfall, melting sea ice and retreating glaciers, etc, etc. No part of our world is left untouched, and given the current rate of warming, things will only get worse. So what can we do to mitigate global warming?

Position 1 of 5
Read this position →

We must take immediate and radical action to address climate change

The consequences of not acting on the climate emergency are too great. We have the technology today needed to tackle this issue and need to move towards a carbon neutral and green energy world.

Position 2 of 5
Read this position →

We shouldn't do anything to address climate change

This position argues that no action should be taken on climate change. It holds that other problems are more pressing, that stopping climate change is simply too expensive, and that the funds involved would be better redirected to other, more urgent causes.

Position 3 of 5
Read this position →

We should take gradual action to address climate change to avoid disruption

This position holds that we should act on climate change, but gradually, to avoid disrupting the economy and people's livelihoods. It argues for beginning a measured transition to renewable energy and for governments to incentivise going green, rather than imposing sudden, radical change.

Position 4 of 5
Read this position →

There is nothing that we can do to address climate change

This position holds that nothing can be done about climate change, the Earth's systems being too vast for human action to affect. Its arguments range from the fatalist view that the climate is in God's hands to the claim that its changes are natural and beyond our power to alter.

Position 5 of 5
Read this position →

We need to artificially reshape the climate system to survive

This position holds that we must artificially reshape the climate system through geo-engineering to survive. It argues that conventional clean technologies cannot be deployed fast enough, and that humans won't change behaviour in time — leaving radical intervention the only realistic option.