Over the next week activists will say that we have a moral responsibility to solve “the climate crisis.” Unwittingly, they are helping prop up one of the most immoral situations in history.

Instead of concentrating on helping vulnerable people adapt to climate change in the present, climate campaigners are focused on mitigation, trying to avert hypothetical climate problems that may, or may not, someday happen.

The United Nations has said that funding for mitigation and adaptation should be approximately equal. But the San Francisco-based Climate Policy Initiative demonstrates that only 6 percent of the $1 billion per day spent on climate finance across the world is dedicated to adaptation. The rest goes to mitigation.

The reason for this is clear. Promoting mitigation is far more attractive to players who have motivations other than environmental protection or helping the poor: energy companies, environmental groups and carbon traders trying to maximize revenue, politicians wanting to increase taxes and control over their citizens, one world government advocates, etc. The “boots on the ground” approach typically required by adaptation initiatives do not so nearly fulfill the ulterior motives of these groups.

Fortunately, people from across the political spectrum are starting to recognize that allocating more importance to the unpredictable problems of people yet to be born than to the serious issues faced by those suffering today is immoral.

Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (Mech.)
Executive Director
International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)
685 Fraser Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 2R7
Canada