Shale gas is the extraction of gasoline/oil from shale - also called fracking. There's a song "What the frack is going on?" that can help to bring this to the world's attention, but we need more.

Shale gas produces double the emissions of normal oil extraction, and we should really be phasing oil out anyway. On the other hand, it apparently causes half the emissions of coal, and places like China are using more and more of this. So it's difficult. Can Avaaz research this and tell us more facts, so we can decide whether or not to lobby for shale gas extraction to cease? (not that anyone can do anything about China, unfortunately, but other parts of the world including USA are going ahead with this)

For all the hype and popularity of green issues and scientific consensus at our disposal relating the impending effects of delayed action on climate issues – climate change still seem to be relegated to the ‘not that urgent’ pile in the day-to-day decision making process. We have been warned repeatedly by scientists and climate researchers that the window is small and closing – are we going to wait until our only option is to adapt to irreversible change? We desperately need forward thinking and urgent action on climate change, lest we leave the next generation with the consequences of our inaction. In Native American culture, decision-makers would consider the effects of their decisions on seven future generations – have we really considered the effects on the next generation, our own children, by our continued failure to act with urgency? Ilka W – South Africa

- and incentivise oil and coal mining companies to be a part of the solution? Its clear that the era of oil and coal based energy is nearing its end, with mining companies now facing ever stronger opposition to their ventures in ecologically sensitive areas. The amount of green house gases generated by dirty power is immense - isn’t it time energy companies begin thinking ahead to a future without oil and start investing n the development of clean, renewable energy? Here in SA we are still investing billions in the development of new coal fired power stations – this makes no environmental or economic sense whatsoever. Ilka W - South Africa

Before we can think and propose what needs to be done, we need to know how the world really works. How much power do politicians have, who decides and how it is decided? Do those who make decisions listen to the ordinary people or somebody else? Are those who make decisions at present addicts or ideologists of some kind?

What is the point in speaking ideas if one has no power to make change? We already have many talk shows and forums with "solutions", but if the governments always do their usual macho things, then there is not much use in talking.

If, on the other hand, the real nature of the governmental miss-management is exposed, so that everybody can realise what shame it is, then change is easier to accomplish. The role of media is also important to examine.

If the shadowy side of how the world is run is brought into the light, so that all can see its insanity clearly, perhaps that can galvanise a response and make vast masses of people demand a transformation of the present structures.

The denial of climate change and its effects is part of the narrowing of ideas of community necessary for the extreme forms of unprincipled capitalism that have engulfed the world in the last thirty years. Such ideas have promoted a degree of sefl-interest which barely extends to the immediate family let alone wider family and future generations who could be sacrificed in the service of immediate financial gain. Thus Thatcherism, Reaganism could be described as 'grandchild murder'. This has been as virulent in its effects as , and equivalent morally, to the creation of inter-ethnic violence, for example in Rwanda, which set family members assigned to different ethnic categories against each other. Sometimes this resulted in grandparents directly killing their own grandchildren. Tony Booth, Canterbury.

All minds seem to be addressing amelioration by cutting CO2 emissions or sequestrating CO2 and substitutuing renewables for carbon based fuels.

More important for the long term is to change the process.

I believe David Sandborn Scott provides the answer in his epic book "SMELLING LAND - The Hydrogen Defense Against Climate Catastrophe" published by the Canadian Hydrogen Association 2007 www.h2.ca In this, any source of of electricity, including nuclear but excluding carbon fuels, is used to hydrolyse water into hydrogen and oxygen. These two gases in liquified form took Buzz Adrin to the moon in 1969. Surely hydrogen can power all our needs for the future either by direct combustion or by conversion back to electricity via fuel cells. The byproduct is H2O not CO2! The synergy of hydrogen and electricity is called hydricity. John Freer, South Africa. jfreer@iafrica.com

It's clear that the number of people - who are truly concerned about our future - is growing everey day. Voices are rising everywhere.
Our politicians however, don't appear to be this concerned. Maybe they're more concerned about money? Maybe they are being influenced by big companies and internationale money machines?
How can we make our politicians really listen to us instead of looking the other way? They have to take their responsibility urgently.
Example: during the last european summit, european leaders shook off their promises for carbon emissions they made years ago. Suddenly, they were discussing about how to shift their responsibility in carbon emission to third world countries. Sad...