> Think of this problem in terms of how many people would need to change the way they do things. Looking to the future, virtually the whole of humanity will dr

> Think of this problem in terms of how many people would need to change the way they do things. Looking to the future, virtually the whole of humanity will drastically need to change the way they do things to cope with the changes in climate. It's likely too late now, but there would be far less changes needed if we stop pumping out so much CO2 into the air and thus reduce the likelihood of climate catastrophes. > And how many financial interests (with the resources to actively lobby against change) would be affected too. Putting financial interests ahead of the health of our environments is how we got into this mess. > If you have an obvious answer that takes those two things into account I'd love to hear it! You've framed the problem in an unhelpful way - you're asking for a solution that perpetuates unsustainable practices.