Climate Change... Urged by Economy??

Source: http://dailyguideafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Global-Warming-Climate-Change.jpg

After all the hype of COP21 and the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris, I was anxious to hear about the final results -- what happened? -- after seeing image after image of some form of success, what does it mean? Honestly, after much digging and sifting through web searches, this is the best recap I can find from the UN FCCC Website:

On one hand, it seems wonderful that we have finally reached a point in which our leaders acknowledge the need for change. Yet, one question still remains: What is our course of action? According to the COP21 Website:

Why is this agreement historic and why will 12 December 2015 be remembered as a great day for the planet?
It has been widely recognised, with unanimous agreement from scientists, that the earth’s atmosphere is growing warmer due to greenhouse gas emissions generated by human activity. The aim of the Paris Conference that was held from 30 November to 12 December at the Le Bourget exhibition centre was to come up with a response to this problem, which is threatening to wipe out the human presence in certain parts of the world.
Keeping the rise in temperature below 2°C
This agreement marks a change in direction, towards a new world. It confirms the target of keeping the rise in temperature below 2°C. Scientists believe that a greater increase in temperature would be very dangerous. The agreement even establishes, for the first time, that we should be aiming for 1.5°C, to protect island states, which are the most threatened by the rise in sea levels.
How can we manage to avoid global warming?
By 12 December 2015, 186 countries had published their action plan (further information); each of these plans sets out the way in which they intend to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The UN body that deals with climate change (the UNFCCC*) published an evaluation of these contributions on 1 November 2015 (further information). This study showed that despite the unprecedented mobilization shown by States, at this rate global warming would still be between 2.7°C and 3°C, i.e. above the threshold set by scientists.
The Paris agreement therefore asks all countries to review these contributions every five years from 2020; they will not be able to lower their targets and are encouraged, on the contrary, to raise them.
In addition, emissions should peak as soon as possible and the countries will aim to achieve carbon neutrality in the second half of the century. This is a real turning point. We are going to gradually stop using the most polluting fossil fuels in order to reach this goal.

And just how are the governments going to do this? Oh, well, they're supposed to implement carbon mitigation to reduce the current carbon emissions that are contributing to the environment with the goal of keeping global temperature rising below 2ºC. Let's face it though - no government or business is going to do this without incentive and to their benefit - the economy and money will have the final toll on whether or not this is going to happen. So, the UN has devised the following incentive for financial purposes; according to the UNFCCC Paris Agreement:

"[COP 21] Recognizes the importance of adequate and predictable financial resources, including for results based payments, as appropriate for the implementation of policy approaches and positive incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks; as well as alternative policy approaches, such as join mitigation and adaptation approaches for the integral and sustainable management of forests; while reaffirming the importance of non-carbon benefits associate with such approaches; encouraging the coordination of support from inter alia, public and private, bilateral and multilateral sources, such as the Green Climate Fund, and alternative sources in accordance with relevant decisions by the Conference of Parties." - Paragraph 55

Really?? Are we really putting the economy before the health and well-being of the planet we live on? This is where I think back to the many lectures of Dr. David Suzuki:

So, what are we, as people on the ground, the front line, going to do about it? Well, a number of things can be done, though what is really going to make a difference? How about taking a real close look at our lives, and our lifestyle. Do you know the actual impacts of what you buy? Before you purchase something, do you think about what message you are sending to the overarching 'powers-that-be' that control industry, our economy, and the world we live in? Perhaps what we really need is a social revolution - one that reconsiders the way we live our lives - yet, this is going to require change at a real, true, fundamental level... because, continuing to do what we're doing is a form of madness. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results, is madness.

It's time to stop rewarding negative behaviour with positive incentives (i.e. money, tax reductions, "green" labeling, etc.). Can we really leave the future of our planet in the hands of people that are influenced by money? What price would you put on the world your future grandchildren will have??

2016 is nearing and a time that many people start to consider what direction they want their lives to go in the next year, five years, or ten years. Perhaps it's time to start thinking about the present day, for the benefit of that future.