> I actually think that Putin's war in Ukraine is just a scapegoat. Price increases started mid year 2021. War certainly didn't help though.
I actually agree with this. The only reason I brought it up as an example is that I had no idea Russia and Ukraine were such significant exporters of wheat, so that had a direct connection to the cost of breakfast in my country.
Truth is, the twin pressures of COVID-19 and this war is causing a lot of inconvenience. That, and other factors I'm not aware of.
> It's another one of those that I consider too broad and philosophical for me to understand.
I guess the simplest way I could put it is this: a disruption in the supply of wheat from two countries has caused the cost of breakfast to almost double in mine.
Relating it to climate change: if a small rise in temperature causes crops to fail (because they cannot survive in such temperatures), food will become expensive everywhere. What happens when many people cannot afford to buy food? They riot.
If you're American, you might remember the chaos of the George Floyd protests. That kind of instability is not good. No one wants it.
What I feel I need to add is the obvious: burning fossil fuels is not the only way climate can change. It also happens naturally, and other natural forces like volcanic eruptions or comet strikes can destabilize a region's climate.
So we burning fossil fuels is not the only thing we should care about. Sustainability thinking must go beyond that.
The only other thing I can say is this: too much change too quickly has a lot of negatives we want to avoid. Uncertainty is expensive. Climate change causes a lot of things to change too quickly for comfort, and no one wants that.
Most conversations around climate change come down to that fact.
I actually agree with this. The only reason I brought it up as an example is that I had no idea Russia and Ukraine were such significant exporters of wheat, so that had a direct connection to the cost of breakfast in my country.
Truth is, the twin pressures of COVID-19 and this war is causing a lot of inconvenience. That, and other factors I'm not aware of.
> It's another one of those that I consider too broad and philosophical for me to understand.
I guess the simplest way I could put it is this: a disruption in the supply of wheat from two countries has caused the cost of breakfast to almost double in mine.
Relating it to climate change: if a small rise in temperature causes crops to fail (because they cannot survive in such temperatures), food will become expensive everywhere. What happens when many people cannot afford to buy food? They riot.
If you're American, you might remember the chaos of the George Floyd protests. That kind of instability is not good. No one wants it.
What I feel I need to add is the obvious: burning fossil fuels is not the only way climate can change. It also happens naturally, and other natural forces like volcanic eruptions or comet strikes can destabilize a region's climate.
So we burning fossil fuels is not the only thing we should care about. Sustainability thinking must go beyond that.
The only other thing I can say is this: too much change too quickly has a lot of negatives we want to avoid. Uncertainty is expensive. Climate change causes a lot of things to change too quickly for comfort, and no one wants that.
Most conversations around climate change come down to that fact.