My impression of the consensus is that at the scale of human civilization, climate change is expected to slowly inflict significant (but not global catastrophic) economic and humanitarian damage, sometimes forcing whole regions to change how they do things, and that it’s cost-effective to coordinate while it’s not entirely too late to reduce this damage by reducing climate change. Many people know this (it’s not a neglected cause), so additional personal effort won’t meaningfully affect things. There is essentially no direct existential risk. Is this a mistaken impression (about the consensus, not about the issue itself), are there more significant aspects?
So I’m not at all concerned about this. In the sense that being justifiably concerned is to expect that additional effort or study in this direction is one of the most valuable things I should be doing.
My impression of the consensus is that at the scale of human civilization, climate change is expected to slowly inflict significant (but not global catastrophic) economic and humanitarian damage, sometimes forcing whole regions to change how they do things, and that it’s cost-effective to coordinate while it’s not entirely too late to reduce this damage by reducing climate change. Many people know this (it’s not a neglected cause), so additional personal effort won’t meaningfully affect things. There is essentially no direct existential risk. Is this a mistaken impression (about the consensus, not about the issue itself), are there more significant aspects?
So I’m not at all concerned about this. In the sense that being justifiably concerned is to expect that additional effort or study in this direction is one of the most valuable things I should be doing.