General Industry News, page-83

@treefellar - It has taken 20 to 30 years to convince the majority of the population that global warming is happening due to carbon and other pollution and to take serious action even if it costs more to do so. Many younger voters have never known a world in which they believe that global warming is not real, and that proportion of the population is only going to grow. Governments like to stay in power by pleasing voters. Therefore I cannot see the push to decarbonise will go away in our lifetimes - and even if that was to happen, it will take at least another 20 to 30 years to change the view of the majority of the population.

I say this having been a global warming sceptic. I remember watching a documentary some years ago about an ancient civilisation that used roman style aqueducts and similar for water movement way before the romans. I think it was in South America (but don't recall). They were investigating why that civilisation got wiped out. What they found by drilling ice cores in the glaciers from the nearby mountain ranges was that at around the time of that civilisation getting wiped out, there was an extended period of drought (high snow in the mountains equalled low snow on the coast). I used to think that if things like that happened many hundreds of years ago, you can't blame everything on climate change today.

Regardless of whether you believe in climate change or not, I can't see how taking billions of tonnes of things from the earth and blowing them into our atmosphere over an extending period of time is going to have a good outcome. And if that can be accepted, then decarbonisation should occur regardless of ones belief in climate change.

Whilst a reversal of climate change beliefs and decarbonisation may be on your threats section of your SWAT analysis, I assume you consider whether it should have less weight than other items on your SWAT.