Links to other
pages
BACK TO CLIMATE CHANGE
MAIN PAGE
WATER: WORLD
IS IN CRISIS
BIODIVERSITY
UNDER THREAT
MILLIONS MADE
INTO REFUGEES
EL NIÑO: THREAT FROM THE OCEAN
SUSTAINABLE
LIVING
MAIN PAGE
International response has been too little, too late
World leaders have been slow to react to climate change. In fact some of them still aren’t reacting at all.
There has been a lot of talk, and a lot of energy has been used by jet planes flying politicians and scientists around the world for meetings at which they tell each other what they should be doing.
But when it all boils down to it, very little has actually been done—and certainly nothing on the scale that will be necessary to halt and reverse the process of climate change.
Such achievements as there have been so far, fall into the category of ‘too little, too insignificant, and too late.’
Fortunately, most world leaders now understand that they will have to take drastic, united, and immediate action if the problem is to be solved.
The United Nations, through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is now leading the way with initatives to deal with climate change, including a follow-up agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol.
The “best case” scenario that scientists have been able to come up with so far is that global warming will be contained to a 2°C temperature rise by the end of this century if greenhouse gas emissions can be contained at their current levels.
The “worst case” scenario puts the rise at 6°C (and perhaps even higher) with catastrophic consequences.
Greenhouse emissions can’t be contained at their current levels, never mind being turned back to the levels of mid last century—or even back to the 1800s when the industrial revolution began—which is what would have to happen for climate balance to be restored.
China, the world’s most populous nation, is in the throes of an economic revolution on an unprecedented scale. After years of repression it’s a country with a lot of catching up to do. Its industries are expanding at a phenomenal rate and as they do, they are pumping ever increasing volumes of greenhouse pollution into the atmosphere.
Every ten months China’s greenhouse emissions increase by more than 500 million tonnes, which is the same amount of industrial pollution that Australia pumps out in a year.
India is set to become the next economic powerhouse and will almost certainly be responsible for greatly increased pollution levels.
But these developing countries aren’t the only culprits. America continues to be the world’s biggest polluter, with some of the world’s dirtiest industries. America emits more than 25% of the pollution which is heating up the world.
So far, the only positive international initiative has been the Kyoto Protocol (see panel at right) But even if the world was united behind Kyoto, it’s only a sticking plaster solution, and world leaders are now meeting to decide on the next step.
The Kyoto Protocol commits some of its 165 signatories (developing nations are exempt) to reduce (by 2008-2012) their levels of greenhouse emissions to 5.2% below their 1990 levels of pollution. In fact, given the projected level of total emissions globally by 2010, this would represent a 29% reduction.
Kyoto isn’t a total solution but it will be a significant starting point if its targets are achieved.
Mitigation or adaptation?
Only about one per cent of informed scientists still refuse to believe that human activity has caused global warming—and a few silly politicians cling desperately to the hope that they are right.
Leaders like America’s George Bush use the economic argument. Curbs on industry mean curbs on economic growth. It’s a weak argument because sustainable solutions often provide a greater economic benefit than doing nothing.
Certainly, future generations won’t be applauding them for their inaction.
As a Dutch expert wryly noted recently: the cost of rebuilding dykes to protect his low-lying country would be considerably less than the cost of it being inundated by rising sea levels.
According to a recent survey in America (September 2006) more large corporations than ever acknowledge they face commercial risks or opportunities because of climate change, but fewer than half are doing anything about it.
Eighty-seven percent of the companies participating said they thought climate change could have a commercial impact on their business. But only 48 percent had set up a formalised program to reduce their own carbon emissions
Another argument put forward as an excuse for inaction is the ‘learn to live with it’ solution.
When the former Labor Federal Opposition in Canberra called for a regional policy on environmental refugees, the then Environment Minister responded that it was unnecessary because Australia was helping Pacific island nations with adaptation measures. He didn’t make it clear how people will adapt to living underwater when their island homes are submerged by rising seawaters.
An August 2006 conference in England was told that governments should be adopting adaptation policies in tandem with mitigation policies.
Frances Cairncross, Chair of Britain’s Economic and Social Research Council, said countries needed to adopt policies to help people adapt to living in a hotter, drier world.
“That may involve, for instance, developing new crops, constructing flood defences, setting different building regulations or banning buildings close to sea level,” she said.
The Kyoto Protocol
The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement made in Japan in 1997 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
It commits some of the 165 nations that have ratified it, to reducing their greenhouse emissions to 5.2% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012.
It also allows a system of emissions trading, whereby heavy polluters can buy credits from other countries that produce less pollution.
Developing countries are exempt from the Protocol’s emission reduction targets.
America has not signed the Kyoto Protocol.
Arnie’s solution
California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has supported legislation that makes his State the first in America to cap greenhouse emissions.
Schwarzenegger rejected opposition from big business. “It strengthens our economy and cleans our environment,” he said.
He and other supporters believe business can make more money by switching to energy-efficient systems and developing clean technologies while new jobs will be created by a burgeoning service industry catering for companies’ green demands.
•Fact
Every time an Australian politician flies to an international conference on climate change it creates at least five tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. That is the amount generated per passenger by a 747 flying from Australia to Europe and back.