Importance of Natural Resources

Rich vs. Poor: Who Should Pay To Fix Climate Change? | Hot Mess ๐ŸŒŽ


In the 1700s, as Great Britain was ramping
up its manufacturing, it realized it was sitting on a seemingly endless supply of cheap energy
that burned better than trees: Coal. All this black stuff in the ground was a game-changer,
kicking off a new age called the Industrial Revolution. You may have heard of it. Over the past few centuries, a handful of
countries reaped the benefits of fossil fuels and developed their economies, emitting a
lot of greenhouse gases along the way. We now know these gases have changed the climate. But since the mid-2000s, an interesting shift
has occurred. The majority of greenhouse gas emissions are
now coming from large developing countries, who are looking for cheap energy sources to
drive their own economic growth, just like rich countries before them. So who’s responsible for fixing this mess? The rich countries who have played the biggest
role in causing it? Or the poor countries who are currently emitting
the most carbon? [OPEN] As the world has awakened to the downsides
of coal and other fossil fuels, developing countries have found themselves in a catch-22. They also want to grow their economies and
infrastructure, and the easiest — and cheapest way — to do that, is by burning fossil fuels. But that will exacerbate climate change, which
will hit many developing countries the hardest and quickest as they deal with increasingly
intense and deadly heat waves, droughts, and tropical storms. The thing is, developing countries don’t want
to put their economies on pause while they invest in low-emission energy sources that
may cost more. That’s where international climate agreements
come in! In the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world’s
countries all set goals to reduce their emissions, and a crucial part of the deal is that wealthy
countries are contributing money to help developing countries pay for the costs of cutting emissions. They’re supposed to do it through the Green
Climate Fund. That fund will also help poor tropical nations,
who don’t contribute much to climate change at all but will be among the hardest hit. Small island nations, for example, collectively
contribute less than one percent of global emissions, but generally lack the resources
and infrastructure to bounce back from the impact of rising sea levels and stronger tropical
storms. So, why should rich nations pay the price
when developing nations are the ones currently emitting the majority of greenhouse gases? That’s the million dollar question… well, actually the 30 TRILLION dollar question. What that means is climate change will be
terrible for rich countries too. If fossil fuel emissions continue at their
current rate, summer temperatures in many places will spike by more than 4˚C degrees
by 2100. That may not seem like a lot, but it’s about
the same difference in temperature between this year and the last ice age. But that ice age thawed over the course of
several millennia — not a century. Adding that amount of heat will cause havoc
in a variety of ways: More of the world’s population will be exposed to heat stress. Tropical diseases will spread to new regions,
water will become more scarce, and crop yields will take a major hit. And this will cost a TON of money – 30 trillion
dollars in damages globally from just 2 degrees Celsius. On the other hand it’s estimated that for
big emitters to make the necessary changes to cut fossil fuel use, it will cost about
half a trillion dollars, which is a lot. But half a trillion dollars, 30 trillion dollars…
you do the math. The quicker we act to reduce emissions, no
matter who’s making them, the more effective our efforts will be and the better chance
we have to avoid some of the most disastrous effects of climate change. So, climate change hits our bottom line, and
speed is of the essence, and practically speaking, rich nations can act faster and do more right
now. Nations that have more stand to lose more
from climate change, which is why it’s also in developed nations’ best interests to
lead the charge in cutting their own emissions while at the same time helping other countries
do the same. Paying now will save trillions of dollars
by preventing global destruction, displacement, and loss of life in the future. No one wants to be the country responsible
for screwing things up for everybody. Fixing climate change would be a far more
satisfying legacy. And that’s something that every nation on
Earth, rich or poor, should be able to agree on.


Reader Comments

  1. Most emerging and developing economies are doing their best to adapt renewables already, just look at the countries which signed and folllowing the Paris accord.
    The efforts by developed countries though is very poor, their per capita consumption is really high amd that needs to be addressed first, people from those countries should learn how to manage electricity usage properly.

    This video clearly fails to dissect the issue deeper and put forth some statistics regarding current state of countries involved/uninvolved in the Paris climate agreement. Please don't create a half backed story.

  2. I see mu country flag ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฉ then i dislike this., what the hell asking us to pay for climate change, we are the victim of climate change from those โ€œmaster of judgingโ€ country EU-US ., just because we produce palm oil so we should responsible for world climate change,? EU-US should get a mirror, who creating vehicles, atomic bomb, demanding on oil, carbon industries, ?? Such a hypocrite, you start the problem but now blaming every country to responsible for this problem., Fix it by your own, if you donโ€™t like then just go to the mars

  3. Actually in India we have started using CNG for vechicles in the future maybe CNG will dominate anyways what's orange POTUS. doing for you OPOTUS is just screwing things over and he has made things worse for us too.

  4. So you blame india or any other developing country for the climate just want to ask a simple question ''how did US became the developed country surely in the time when there was only coal and obviously they were the first one to cause pollution or not the meaning of developing country itself means tht they are not tht developed to pause there economy to save the climate and again causing climate to recover that agree or not please give me your views I would like to debate .

  5. I think that there are a lot of factors to climate change that could be differentiated such as emmission from factories , vehicles, impacts on deforestation, etc. These factors led to each countries having the possibility to contribute in different ways to the problem itself, rather than differentiating between the developing and developed states.

  6. Now the European are developed , they are stoping developing country in name of climate change or environmental issues

  7. The climate is always changing and has always changed. And humans have not exacerbated it. We are still in an ice age. That's why the it the atrtic still has a lot of ice. We are coming out of the ice age and have been for a long time. And our resources are better spent on helping humans adapt and colonizing space.

  8. Its our world and we all should pay to fix it,,,it is going to harm everyone and we all are responsible for it

  9. But this video conveniently edits out metrics like CO2 emissions per annum, CO2 emissions per capita, all GHG emissions, historical emissions, historical emissions per capita etc. Cuz these place the blame (and onus to pay) squarely on developed nations as well as the rich populations of developing nations. Essentially, it is a rich vs. poor problem. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/21/countries-responsible-climate-change

  10. This Planet that we call home, doesn't belong to only rich countries or developing countries, it belongs to all mankind. Humanity has to collectively pitch in as a single unified force to save our home from a sure shot destruction if we don't do something about it Now and Fast, rather than playing the blame game by saying it's your problem not mine coz you created it in the first place.

  11. This is pure nonsense!!!
    USA and other developed nations are responsible for the climate change and don't you dare to talk about India, Indonesia etc. about the climate change – we will stop until we are equally developed like developed nations such as USA ๐Ÿค—

  12. Rothschild's Central Banks should pay for all of Climate Change. Since the Central Banks own 80% of the polluting steel mills, coal power plants, and fossil fuel burning vehicles. Ever hear of mega corporations? And mega banks? Central Banks own them, too. Rothschild's own ALL Central Banks!

  13. I think fossil fuel companies should pay to fix this mess. It was one thing when people didn't know what burning fossil fuels did to the environment, but now that we know, the companies that continue to sell fuels are the direct source of the problem. Instead of helping to fix it and take one for the team by risking going bankrupt, they have decided to try and make as much cash as possible before they disappear.

  14. AAAAAAALLLLLLLL OOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFF TTTTTTTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEMMMMMMMMM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. CO2 Emissions per capita 2016

    Canada = 18.62 tons per capita

    USA = 15.56 tons per capita

    Japan = 9.68 tons per capita

    China = 7.45 tons per capita

    UK = 5.59 tons per capita

    Indonesia = 2.03 tons per capita
    India = 1.92 tons per capita
    http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=CO2andGHG1970-2016&dst=CO2pc&sort=des9

    CO2 Emissions per capita 2015

    USA = 15.53 tons per capita

    Canada = 15.32 tons per capita

    Japan = 8.99 tons per capita

    China = 6.59 tons per capita

    UK = 5.99 tons per capita

    Indonesia = 1.72 tons per capita
    India = 1.58 tons per capita
    https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#.W7HbHmgzaUk

    CO2 Emissions per capita 2014

    USA = 16.5 tons per capita

    Canada = 15.1 tons per capita

    Japan = 9.5 tons per capita

    China = 7.5 tons per capita

    UK = 6.5 tons per capita

    Indoensia = 1.8 tons per capita
    India = 1.7 tons per capita
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/en.atm.co2e.pc?year_high_desc=false

  16. In my opinion, we should threaten to nationalize oil companies into the government, if they dont start funding efforts to combat climate change. They are the ones who should pay.

  17. No mention of outsourcing… most products used by the Global North are produced somewhere else, this will give another image of CO2 emissions

  18. The climate is controlled by the Sun and nature's forces. The idea that a trace gas has any significant influence is ridiculous, as all of you will find out in the next few decades when global cooling will become the norm. You don't even realise it has already begun, but it will take a few years before it gains momentum. Many will die because the world is not prepared for it. Crops will fail and people will starve.

  19. Looking at global problems in the context of "nation states" is hugely problematic. The world needs to unite as one and get over this whole zero-sum approach of competition among "countries". Climate change is everyone's problem.

  20. Great video. Explaining that the costs in the future wil be many times more than the cost we pay now. Its a no-brainer. We must act now.

  21. One effect of the shift from fossil fuels, that isn't explicitly mentioned in this video–and possibly the biggest factor in the US and developed world's inaction/hesitancy (aside from direct individual interests)–is the changes it will cause in the economy. Prices for common goods and services will rise, and domestic economies will take a hit before they adjust, and new infrastructure is put in place for whatever the next energy-driven economy will look like. . . I think a lot of the resistance to the new energy economy comes from fossil fuel companies capitalizing off of the conservative's fear of a downturn in the economy.

  22. These nations are rich and polluting in the past. That makes them the bigger contributor. These other nations are just getting rich and only polluting in recent history. That makes them the innocent parties. -yeah ok. have fun with that idea.

  23. Just to be clear; I can still go get a multi million dollar loan for development of beach front properties and investment properties from many banks with 30-50 year terms, right? OK then, at least I know NONE of the big bankers and investment firms are buying into the Climate Change Hoax.

  24. Those who caused planet damage should be the ones to fix it, specifically the rich since they have all the money with much of it being stolen

  25. When you realize how much was spent on the war in the Middle East, any bellyaching about what needs to be spent by all members of the United Nations is sheer stupidity. But, in the end, weโ€™ll all pay.

  26. The Indian people don't know that the floods,storms and droughts are occuring due to climate change.
    Only a handful of people in India get to decide if we stop using fossil fuels. And they have decided to not stop, so that they can get richer.
    Renewable energy is actually cheaper than coal now, then why invest in 100s of coal fired power plants?

  27. If you can fix climate change, then plan the storms from now on. Let's have a little snow in Mexico maybe once every 2 years. Let's manipulate mother nature so New York is sunny year round and California gets blizzards and black-outs. We could have so much fun if everyone just joined in to change the weather to a more suitable direction and cancel it's natural change.

  28. who gives a flying fu*k anyway,developing countries should go full throttle in development to lift the population lifestyle,these western countries are biggest hypocrites and per capita they are the biggest polluters on planet earth

  29. If the world's wealthiest 10% of people lived like average Europeans then CO2 emissions would fall by 1/3.
    In the UK 70% of all flights are taken by just 15% of the population and more than 50% do not fly at all.
    It is not countries that we need to focus our attention on but the richest in every country.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *