- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Research conducted by researchers at the University of Gothenburg shows that people tend to rate their own risk of being affected by climate change as lower than that of others. This perception may reduce individuals’ willingness to act and slow down necessary climate measures.
The researchers observed the effect in Europe, the United States and Asia, but the discrepancy was most pronounced among Europeans.
You must log in or register to comment.
The ones who would be affected the most are those that aren’t even born yet.
So the headline is true in a dark kind of way
i hate this individualistic and spineless society we’ve ended up building.
Of course it primarily affects others! There’s a whole lotta others and only one me! That’s why I gotta help!
I mean it’s true, it will affect me less than most people simply for the fact that I live in a first world country with moderate climate. That doesn’t mean it won’t affect me, and even if it wasn’t affecting me at all I wouldn’t want other people to suffer from climate change.
Currently, some of the countries most directly affected by climate change are in Europe, like Spain, Switzerland, Germany and France.
Wouldn’t India and Bangladesh, for example, be worse? In summer they get heat waves above 50º C, and I know there’s at least a river in Bangladesh that is being flooded by salt water , and agriculture is becoming impossible. And a lot of people have been dislocated as well in the last decade because of the rising waters.
I should have said “Currently, some of the countries” indeed. I’ll correct it.
The biggest difference between, let’s say Bangladesh and Germany is that in Bangladesh, most of the damage happens to people, in richer countries the damages are heavily material…
Their comment feels like they are ignoring their cup that’s on its way to boiling, while their neighbors has already started.
When those places become inhospitable, they need to go somewhere, and if your climate is already stressed, they won’t be able to start doing anything, since it’s already too late.
If affects everyone, even when it appears it’s only your neighbours. It doesn’t affect them less, just later.
Even in mild climates it’s causing massive heat and/or chill spikes that will kill crops and destroy trees and other plants.
You’re affected, and this article is proving the point quite well with comments like yours.
Oh I’m by no means trying to imply that it’s not necessary to enact massive changes in order to fight climate change, I think it’s one of the most important things to do right now.
I live in the US Pacific Northwest. Of course others are being worse affected than I am. Beliefs can also be facts. Relying on everyone believing that they are the worst affected by climate change is not a good strategy.
Sure, however us PNW residents will get increasingly intense atmospheric rivers (as we’ve already seen several times this year). That’s how climate change manifests here, excessive rainfall followed by extra dry summers. A recipe for massive wildfires.
“Being affected by“ is a very general statement. Of course everyone is being affected. But in the middle of Europe people won’t need to become refugees due to unliveable conditions, burning, drought, starvation etc. So it will be more immediate around the equator I guess. However, I feel not so well informed and maybe I’m wrong.
But in the middle of Europe people won’t need to become refugees due to unliveable conditions, burning, drought, starvation etc
When the AMOC shuts down you’ll all suffer from extreme cold instead.
That’s where you’re wrong.
Climate change isn’t just affecting people but industries as well - agriculture being one of the major ones.
In countries where winters used to be truly cold (-5 to -10C regularly), the ecosystem depended on those freezes happening to both germinate certain produce, as well as to kill off parasites.
Without the cold winters, parasites survive and decimate the resulting production.
With the weather becoming more and more unpredictable, agriculture is becoming harder to maintain. Sure we can do greenhouses, but good luck growing wheat, corn, etc. there. You need massive fields to produce enough to cover the needs of the population, let alone export.
Not to mention the effects of random weather causing hailstorms which in turn destroys production as well - including greenhouses.
And local food production shortages WILL lead to mass migration. There’s already a very present migration pattern established in Europe, citizens of south-eastern Europe moving North and West to get out of the poor conditions of the various Balkan states - but there’s even further migration happening from countries one would consider well off enough to have little to no migration…
Sure it’s not that visible but that migration you say won’t happen is already happening.
A lot of fruit trees need “chill hours” to be able to fruit next season.
Thanks for the insights. I’m happy and unhappy at the same time to learn. I know mass migration is happening and will accelerate. I just meant that Europeans will not be the refugees but the part receiving migration. And it will be terrible since no refugee is welcome anymore anywhere. Even people from warzones, which is easier to grasp than people fleeing from climate effects. Truely concerning.
It was 50 degrees F here last week. The trees are budding, which I don’t think I’ve ever seen in January.
I’m amused because those things are true of where I am except that it’s normal in January. I still hear people being surprised by it every year, though.
It’s definitely not normal here, usually it’s single digit temperatures in January and February
The math ckecks out. If a 100 people are at risk of being affected by climate change, I am only 1% at risk and the otheres are 99% at risk. But we’re talking about billions, so the risk is even lower than that. /s
It’s the ship whose front fell of. It’s out of my environment.
This is why it’s difficult to make any change.
I live in the arctic. I have no such delusions.
