Global warming, also referred to as climate change, is an increase of the Earth’s temperature and oceans overtime. It has attracted significant attention since its impact was fist felt in the late 19th century. Theories concerning global warming attempt to describe its effects, and account on how human activities have contributed to the rising concentrations of greenhouse gases. Global warming affects different areas in different ways. Nevertheless, the earth is believed to be adversely affected by this phenomenon. Regardless its negative impacts on most regions, some of them would benefit from global warming. One serious consequences described by the author is the rate at which sea level rises. This will eventually lead to the expansion of oceans, increase in sea levels and submergence of islands like Maldives.
The article focuses on two factors determining if an area will thrive or suffer in future because of climate change. These are temperature and adaptability. The author argues that countries in the cold regions would gain from an increase in a few degrees of temperature. For instance, it would be cheaper to ship goods through Arctic waters in northern Europe and Asia since climate change would clear the icy water enhancing navigation for most parts of the year. Consequently, the agricultural sector in some countries would benefit immensely. In northern Europe, there would be a 30 percent increase in wheat production. Similarly, Norway would benefit as the temperature rise would result in ecological conditions favourable for the growth of wine grapes. However, scientists argue that a temperature increase of four degrees Celsius would result in warmer winters hence opening up new habitats for pest and diseases.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
The article explains that adaptability will determine how a country will fare on because of climate change. Relevant authorities should strategize on how to adapt to climate change in advance. Research shows that even developed countries are vulnerable to climate change. India and United States always try to illustrate how resources affect adaptability in their regions. Based on an analysis of death records from the two countries, it was realised that the unfavourable impacts of climate change had been felt. In rural India, a change in temperature from 1970s to 1990s resulted in 1% increase in annual mortality. However, hotter days in the US resulted in unpretentious mortality rate. This research shows that the US has an abundant access to heating and cooling resources than India.
In my opinion, the article is very beneficial because the author clearly compares and contrasts the effects of global warming effectively. Consequently, the author clearly paints the picture of the future in the readers mind while citing current examples for easier comprehension. To enhance validity, the author cited several research findings from renowned scientist worldwide like Keller Chafes and Derek Lemoine. However, the author concentrated his findings on a few regions, which creates debate. For better appreciation, the article should have cited more evidence on the effects of global warming. The author should have prioritised the developing countries since they are the worse hit despite their insignificant contribution to climate change.
There are several lessons learned from this article. These include the causes of climate change, its expected effects, mitigation and how to adapt to its changes. For a safer and secure planet, the outcome of human activities regarding the earth’s temperature in the past few decades should be synthesized. Through this knowledge, I will be in a better position to channel and implement these ideas to counter climate change. To mitigate climate change in future, human activities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions should be emphasized. Through our behaviours, we should aim at using cleaner and less polluting technologies, which will eventually lead to a substantial reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. After reading the article, I disagree with several existing myths on climate change.