I suppose that Noah must have felt a bit frustrated when he was building the ark and no one would listen to his predictions.
Maybe his feeling of frustration left him when he floated safely away and left all the others behind to drown.
This time around there may be no survivors.

If humans do not take urgent action on global warming then what are the possible consequences?
Will the climate change so that the planet will no longer support human life?

We elect our political leaders because they promise to keep us safe, and to leave us free to gorge on consumer goods and indulge in an unsustainable lifestyle.
Will we have the courage to change our leaderand lifestyle and survive, or will we continue down the path of no return?

How will governments keep us safe from a global culture of corporate greed?

Green elitism on show again ? Who will lead us to the promised green land ? Let's have an evironmental Year Zero ?

I think it would be a hard sell politically to get people to accept a reduction in material lifestyle in exchange for more "happiness". And it would be easy to paint protagonists of such a world view as environmental Pol Pots.

It is more likely that the pollies who sell techno solutions will win the day, even if what they are selling is snake oil to some degree.I think techno solutions are possible given enough resourcing. Maybe the $400 billion that has been spent sending Iraq back to the Stone Age would have been better invested in alternative energy research ?

In addition to better technology we could try some proper pricing on things. I think this is one area where some market solutions may actually have an impact. For example, when the price of petrol was $1.50 per litre there was clear evidence that people began to change their behaviours, evidenced by a decrease in big car sales.

A combined market and technology approach is likely to be better received by the public than an offer of mung bean stew around a dung fire.

I would suggest that whatever the government eventually puts to the environment it focus on the research and development of such products. Strategically increasing funding to universities and supporting Research and Development in business that focus on environmentally and economically beneficial products will provides a positive reward for companies and create another profitable export for our country.

I have wondered why there has not been an 'alternative fuel race' like the cold war 'space race'. Fierce competitions between countries for an alternative to fossil fuels would prove a boon for the global economy. Those successful countries would have developed a product of extraordinary value and their speedy application of such a technology would sever their dependence fossil fuels.



Garbie

I am waiting for the first Treasurer either Labor or Liberal to mention the phrase "sustainable economy" instead of "growth economy" as if it is a finate feature. Thanks to funding cuts to the States the Federal government has $10billion in surplus, wouldn't it be reassuring for our governors to build a hydro-electric power station on the Burdekin Falls Dam, and a wind power generator atop the Great Diving Range every 2-3 Kilometers to ease the burden from coal fired power stations, that though would be innovative, and as we know they operate not on innovation, but rather "conservatism" what a shame for Australia, what a shame for the planet, and our grandchildren.

Howard won't be here to watch the world slowly deteriorate if something is not done now, however our grandchildren will suffer, is that the legacy we want to leave, I for one do not.

The British Government has recently released results of intensive study, compliled by Britan's Chief Scientist and A former World Bank Chief Economist declaring that if government's do not move NOW it will be too late. The environment is too precious to continue to destroy for profit, as the greenies say, Only when the last river has been poisoned, Only after the last fish has been caught, Only then will you findmoney cannot be eaten.