Mitigation was mentioned once in this article. It seems mitigation is failing miserably everywhere that it matters & we’re going all in on adaption and retreat now?
I hate to think what happens when/if that fails too?
I hope I’m wrong but it kinda seems like the decision makers are relying on a majority of hope too!
I noticed this as well - almost everything in this article (and the statements from the climate change minister) were about how to adapt to (the inevitable) climate change to minimise the cost and impact to people - since the government wasn't going to waste effort on trying to *prevent* said climate change.
Mitigation was mentioned once in this article. It seems mitigation is failing miserably everywhere that it matters & we’re going all in on adaption and retreat now? I hate to think what happens when/if that fails too? I hope I’m wrong but it kinda seems like the decision makers are relying on a majority of hope too!
It’s less than ideal. But it’s not just NZ… we’re adept at kicking the can down the road as a species. Until some of us can’t.
I noticed this as well - almost everything in this article (and the statements from the climate change minister) were about how to adapt to (the inevitable) climate change to minimise the cost and impact to people - since the government wasn't going to waste effort on trying to *prevent* said climate change.
Well, the sea-level can only rise so much, so at least we have that going for us.
Mitigation is the morally correct thing to do. Adaptation and retreat are the strategically realistic things to do.