It has been a few months since the issue of climate catastrophism became mainstream that international media has been talking about „eco anxiety“. The Greta generation is so afraid that the world may end up in the climate disaster, and that existence on Earth may become unlivable and frightening, which has ended up developing anxiety, unease, and even pathologies. The definition of „eco anxiety“ was made official for the first time in 2017 by the American Psychological Association as „chronic fear of environmental disaster“ and has become a popular topic in recent months, when Greta Thunberg’s activity has sensitized millions of young people and led them to the streets to protest the environment.
The great physicist Steven Chu, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics, has identified solutions that take advantage of new technologies. He claims that humanity is heading in a way that has no way out, it is going to crash into the wall of emissions from agriculture and livestock. The only solution is to look to the future and rely only on technologies that, year after year, are renewed, coming to lighten the impact on the Planet and looking for tools that can clean up the environment. The examples presented by the winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics concern the studies of one of his students, Yi Cui, who experiments with a new generation of lithium batteries capable of recharging 4 times faster than those in use or the tools used by Zymergen , visionary company, to create new generation microbes.
Physicist and oceanographer Peter Wadhams hypothesized decarbonisation as a possible solution to the climate increase. Thanks to his studies we can identify a remarkable comparison between the frozen world of decades ago and the world of today: there are big evident data such as the reduction of the albedo, the soil’s ability to reflect the sun’s rays, and the rise of the seas that according to the UN it could exceed 1.2 meters by 2100. According to Wadhams nobody wants to change their lifestyle characterized by destructive habits, therefore the only possible solution to deal with the climate disaster is to focus on technological hyper-realism : scientists must impose and influence the decisions of states, but above all they must find methods that clean up the planet faster than it is polluted. Regarding this last point, the great English physicist and oceanographer hypothesizes immense siphons eats CO2 applied on ships capable of absorbing our excess gases, means already idealized in EDPI projects.
A few years ago it was thought that global warming was only the rise in temperatures, melting ice and rising sea levels in the long run.
Today we know that the issue is much more complex, risky, and closer to us: there are many signs of the changing climate, which we can already measure and which are told in thousands of articles in the most prestigious international scientific journals, and summarized every 6 years from the thousands of pages of the volumes of the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN committee on climate. A colossal work able to make the science of the atmosphere and the seas, geology and ecology, hydrology and glaciology, economics and sociology talk to each other, to evaluate the actions of international diplomacy.
The Human Rights Council can no longer afford to rely only on the usual techniques of organizing expert groups, sending reports that lead nowhere, urging others to do more but doing little by themselves and adopting large, but inconclusive resolutions, ”reads Alston’s report.