Poor countries, around the world, tend to be warmer,
have been around longer so more of their natural resources have been used up,
and have higher population densities.
What that means is, while I can afford a furnace and AC, and the energy to run them.
people in poor countries are far less likely to be able to do the same.
IE, rich countries tend to have been populated more recently, and still have more of their natural resources.
Also poor countries are more often pretty flat and near sea level, and thus, be more subject to flooding due to sea level rise.
Flat countries, near sea level, often are pretty good agricultural areas, which means that they can more easily support larger populations.
However, that disperses any wealth over a larger population, leading to poverty.
The wealth of poor countries has nothing to do with Climate Change!
Poor countries are that way simply because of their political systems and crooked business people. You will find very wealthy people in "so-called" poor countries within the Governments and the business community. These wealthy individuals exploit the common working people much worse than what is told. The wealthy people (government and business) also control the media publications, but it seems that you have been fed bad information as to why these people are poor. It's simply due to "ELITE EXPLOITATION"! Poor people have no incentive to better their lives. It's the way it has always been in these countries it seems. Just look at how Haiti was handled recently when other Governments (like the U.S.) sent billions of dollars to help them out. The ELITES ended up with most of that money.
Because they are poor. They have lee ability to adapt. The upside is that you get more global warming if you have more CO2 and more economic growth. All this economic growth means that these poor countries won't be as poor and will then be less affected by climate change. This is a contradiction in the IPCC reports that has gone unacknowledged.
The poor people are not affected by climate change, they are used to adverse conditions, however they are severely affected by climate change policies, as pointed out in the other answers, they cannot afford energy to improve, they use animals and their children to work the land, they cut down trees for heating and cooking.
If they were allowed cheap energy they would prosper, the birthrate would fall, education would increase, the environment would improve.
Even the World Bank has a down on them, refusing to fund any coal fired power stations.
I don't think they are.
People who feel guilty at living in a rich country sometimes want to give money to the poorer countries and they are using climate change as an excuse. The recipients of this money agree that they should get it. If they need climate related problems to qualify then they will give you some climate related problems.
Think about it: Moving your mud hut a hundred miles inland is one problem. Moving Washington DC. or London UK 100 miles inland is a much bigger problem.
the technology used by 2nd world country where they use low quality of technology affecting the environment................... and 3rd world country dont have potential to speak against it.............or control the pollution.
They want Carbon taxes so the money will be redistributed to them
Because they cannot afford AC or heating. Often having colder houses aswell
They're not. They're affected by their own poverty. Global warming is used to heighten the guilt.
YES................we are badly affected and now we intend tochange over to bycyles..................cheapest,right?
they cannot aford defence and adatation system. multi-billion flood defence is beyond their economies
