The Climate Conundrum: Part 1

As a young student, taking Economics, Politics and Geography, I am naturally interested in the future: what world will I be living in when I leave the shelter of education? How will it change as I grow older? As young students we are more invested in the Earths’s future than any generation before us, but it’s not for the right reasons. Overpopulation, Brexit, poverty and ageing populations are all issues our generation will be heavily affected by however, they often feel impossible to solve. They feel out of control. As important as these issues are, if you asked any teenager what worries them most about our future, they would undoubtedly say climate change. Over the past decade there has been rapid spike in awareness and action taken to halt the damage cause by over 200 years of unsustainable living post industrial revolution. Governments, Businesses and the general population of the world have all began to take measures, notable examples being, the Paris Agreement (2016, 190 countries signed) and the emergence of Greta Thunberg and climate protests. However it often seems to me like preventing the damage global warming will cause throughout this century is impossible due to the economic impact of replacing fossil fuels with sustainable methods. Essentially, has humanity dug itself into a whole too deep to clime out of?

In my quest to understand more about this topic, I stumbled across a series of economist articles about the economics surrounding climate change. So, in order to understand the question: To what extent is it economically possible to limit progression and effect of climate change? I will be writing a mini-series of blogs about my response to these articles, and what I believe the impact of their contents is on the question I’ve posed above. Finally, I will attempt to answer the question myself and provide my opinion on the best way to stop global warming, while limiting damage to the global economy.