Climate Change questions do not need to be conclusively answered to determine global actions for the next 30 years

The following questions do not need to be answered to determine energy and transportation policies for the next thirty years.

Is the world warming ?
How much might the world be warming ?
Is there climate change ?
Is human created carbon dioxide the primary impactor on the climate ?

The reason they do not need to be answered.
Adverse impacts of Air pollution are sufficiently bad (killing millions) and putting more people in the hospital and increasing medical costs that the actions which would be taken in the case that there was global warming are the same.

We should do the same things even if global warming is not real.

Do not try to force purity of thought as a starting point, when there can be agreement on actions for different reasons. (economic reasons, other health or business reasons etc…) Have a bigger tent for those who would be willing to support actions.

We would do it to save many lives that are lost to pollution.
We would do it to improve the finances of national and regional governments by lowering health costs.
We would do it for improved quality of life.
We would do it for stronger economies.
China and Russia will be pushing ahead with advancing nuclear fission technology so the western nations can follow later if they want.

UN recommended actions against soot and methane would save 2.5 million lives each year when fully implemented.

A massive push to develop deep burn nuclear power and extraction of uranium from seawater should be undertaken. This would enable a society with ten to one hundreds the level of power of today that would be sustainable for millions of years. However, this political issue and action does not need to be taken by North America or Western Europe. China and Russia will be pushing along this path for the next two to three decades.

If you liked this article, please give it a quick review on ycombinator or StumbleUpon. Thanks