“Discuss two mitigation strategies to deal with the impacts of climate change” by Ms Ava KHALFAOUI

Harvey

2020-02-19 04:17:15 UTC

- Climate Engineering / Geo-Engineering
This would involve removing GHG's from the atmosphere in order to reduce the effects of climate change. This does not assess the root cause of climate change and only delays the inevitable consequences of climate change by altering the global climate which could have unknown effects. We would still be reliant on fossil fuels which are a finite resource therefore would impact economy and the environment as resources become more scarce.

- Gradual transfer to full reliance on renewable sources of energy.
Renewable sources of energy are a infinite resource therefore provide energy security to those who have them. This would help reduce GHG emissions and pollutants in the atmosphere which would help lessen the effects of climate change by tackling the root cause. This however is generally quite expensive to do and renewable sources are mainly limited to geographic location such as wind, solar, geothermal, tidal. Although the accessibility is low, the effects and long term energy security provide significant benefits.

Discuss = Offer a considered and balanced review that includes a range of arguments, factors or hypotheses. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.

khalfaouia2 — 2020-02-19 04:17:42 UTC

Jacqueline

2020-02-19 04:19:26 UTC

Define mitigation
State impacts of climate change

1. phasing out fossil fuels; adoption of renewable alternative sources e.g. switching from coal mining to solar energy
pros
- less polluting than fossil fuels
- less ghg emissions
cons
- can create new environmental concerns
- generally expensive to set up
2. geo-engineering
pros
- carbon offsetting
- effective to an extent
cons
- altering global climate, unknown consequences
- only partially tackles climate change

Phasing out fossil fuels seems to be a better mitigation strategy compared to geo-engineering as it more successfully solves the root cause of anthropogenic climate change: fossil fuel combustion

Matteo

2020-02-19 04:20:14 UTC

Geo-engineering:
Mitigation attempts to reduce the causes of climate change. This mitigation technique consists in using science to reduce the causes of climate change. One example would be installing mirrors between the earth and the sun to reflect sunlight back in the opposite direction from the earth. This counts as a mitigation technique because it reduces the amount of sunlight entering our atmosphere, hence reducing the causes of climate change. However, geo-engineering does not provide an actual solution to climate change, it offers a way of limiting issues instead.

Switch to renewable energy:
The adoption/ use of renewable sources of energy such as wind turbines or solar panels would reduce the amount of GHG emissions and hazardous waste. Our population is growing exponentially, and as of right now the non-renewable energy sources we are currently using are not sustainable, which is why we must switch to sustainable renewable energy sources. However, most of our nation's economies are not following this way of development, especially the LEDCs because the cost of investing in renewable energy sources is extremely high compared to non-renewable energy sources.

Ben

2020-02-19 04:20:14 UTC

1. Reducing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
- Reducing CO2 from the atmosphere seems to be the most logical solution as it is one of the leading factors of climate change.

If we can successfully reduce the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere to a normal level, then we can assume that the consequences of excess CO2 would disappear.

However, on the other hand, reducing CO2 would certainly lead to less efforts to reduce burning fossil fuels and possibly even increase the rate of fossil fuels being burned as people start to rely on CO2 reducing strategies. Furthermore, reducing CO2 doesn't reduce the other pollutants released by burning fossil fuels, this means that air quality would probably continue to worsen and affect multiple regions and populations of the world.

2. Geoengineering
- These solutions seem idyllic however they are purely theoretic. Therefore, theoretically, if these solutions could be developed it could let us continue our current way of life without worrying about the negative consequences they have on our environment and civilizations. It would certainly reduce harmful factors such as rising atmospheric temperatures and therefore rising sea levels and glacial melting.

However, it does not do anything to improve air quality or at least prevent it from worsening. Additionally, because of reliance on these solutions, air quality could worsen because of incentive to reduce fossil fuel consumption being taken away.

Cordelia

2020-02-19 04:20:49 UTC

removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
- increase photosynthesis by reforesting, restoring grasslands
- however this doesn't reduce emissions, it is only part of removing the Co2, doesn't fix the root problem at hand

Reducing energy consumption
- using energy more efficiently, using electric cars, energy efficient light bulbs
- raise awareness and educate younger generation
- eat less meat, reduce carbon footprint
- Hard to implement life style changes, very unlikely to work

Reducing energy consumption is able to deal with the issue at hand and its root cause, which is more effective than reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as doing so will not help the root problem. I believe that we should do our best to reduce our individual energy consumption and gradually be able to lower our energy waste.

Max

2020-02-19 04:21:20 UTC

Mitigation is the reduction of the impacts of an event. In the context of climate change, this would most likely involve reducing out emissions of greenhouse gases that are seen as the main driving factor of climate change. There are two major ways in which we can help to reduce the currently seen impacts. First would be to remove Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere. This could be done through increasing the amount of photosynthetic organisms, or direct capture of the gas using machinery. While these are both viable solutions which would help to reduce the greenhouse effect, they would certainly be costly, and would have to be implemented long-term if our emissions continue as they are now. Another way would be to reduce our own emissions of carbon dioxide, such as adopting cleaner sources of energy and mandating that companies reduce their own emissions through legislation. The best way to tackle the problem would be to implement both strategies. While there may be a large initial cost, the costs subside when the composition of our atmosphere is returned to normal and we are no longer causing global warming.

Vienna

2020-02-19 04:22:59 UTC

- use more biomass
- release sulphur dioxide from airplanes to increase global dimming

sam

2020-02-19 04:24:29 UTC

Stabilise/reduce GHGs

A viable method is to stabilise/reduce greenhouse gases! This reduces energy waste by using it more efficiently. By doing this we reduce the overall demand for energy and electricity. We can also adopt taxes and limits on GHG use. Despite this, we would need the full cooperation from each nation in order to fully incorporate this method.

Geo-engineering

Geo-engineering is basically using science to mitigate global warming. So far the methods are hypothetical, and not tested yet, so we don’t really know if it will actually work, and has ethical questions surrounding it. Some methods of doing this are to scatter iron, nitrates, or phosphates on oceans to increase algal bloom rates. Despite this, it can pose as a temporary solution depending on the effectiveness of the process, so it can allow us more time to develop a better strategy to combat climate change.

Andrea

2020-02-19 04:28:57 UTC

reducing CO2 emissions by implementing the use of low carbon energy sources/renewable energy
- through the implementations of solar, wind, tidal energy etc. It reduces the amount of greenhouse gases produced and carbon dioxide emitted into our atmosphere. the use of low carbon energy sources need to increase in parallel with the growing population. Limitations of using renewable energy is that it can be very costly. Government legislations are not financially supporting these new methods enough. Even if renewable energy is implemented and proves to be able to fully replace fossil fuels, big oil companies wont stop mining until they have completely run out of the resource. We wont completely rely on renewable energy until it is our only choice.

Climate engineering
through scientific research and advancements, the causes of climate change should be reduced. By reducing the causes of climate change, it is clear that the carbon emissions will be offset and global temperatures will decrease. This can be effective because it deals with the root of the problem rather than finding methods to fix what has already happened. Limitations of this are that it is highly theoretical and new scientific explorations may take years to develop and is very costly. However, there are many unknown effects of altering a global climate that could be dangerous <-- something we have never experienced before.

Through implementing low carbon energy sources, we are able to more effectively reduce the global climate change crisis as it directly deals with the issue of fossil fuel combustion