Climate change is a complex issue. So many areas of uncertainty in climate models related to feedback cycles and tipping points emerge, making forecasting a changing climate immensely difficult. However, huge amounts of progress have occurred in recent decades. Earlier models have had surprising amounts of accuracy in their short-term projections, as we can now compare their forecasts with the observations themselves, despite the errors involved. The recent IPCC report contains an enormous 14,000 references, highlighting how much work has gone into unravelling the nature of climate change from its causes to the impacts and solutions.
It is clearer than ever that climate change is real and caused by humans - primarily through fossil fuel consumption. This problem, which is global in scale, has also been contributed disproportionately by different countries, further complicating how to think about a future fix. A recent article by Nathan J. Robinson published in Current Affairs highlights this major geopolitical issue, exploring how we should think more about the climate crisis. The history of industrial activity and the grim legacy of colonisation has shaped the current balance of global financial and political power we observe today. The subsequent imbalance must be reflected in international policy accordingly. This is, in my opinion, where the real complexity of climate change comes into play, and it receives far less attention than it should.
The Global Gap
A single statistic illustrates this contrast perfectly. The US and Canada have contributed about 1/3 of the total global CO2 emissions since the Industrial Revolution. A further 1/3 by Europe, and the remaining 1/3 by the rest of the world. In other words, 2/3 of all CO2 accumulated in the atmosphere comes from only ~12.5% of the planet’s population. These countries have undoubtedly benefited economically via. their contribution to the climate change problem. This economic growth will also enable wealthier countries to better invest in reducing their vulnerability against the impacts of climate change e.g. disaster-proofing and building more resilient infrastructure.
Many developing countries rely on their sensitive climate systems to grow food, with exports (usually limited to a few cash crops in high demand on the global market) driving their economies. This adds another socioeconomic barrier, following small climate changes, compared to countries with more diversified, tech, and finance-dominated economies. Much like the economies of developed countries have risen to astronomical levels, the poorest countries are vulnerable to a cascading effect in the opposite direction. Additionally, many areas of the world highlighted as vulnerable contain high populations e.g. the Mekong Delta region and coastal cities like Jakarta, Indonesia that will bear much of the impact of sea-level rise and water insecurity. Tragically, the countries less responsible for climate change will be the hardest hit. This is an unavoidable outcome of a failed neoliberal experiment.
Figure 1 Cumulative CO2 emissions across the world. Source: Our World in Data
Figure 2 Current population adjusted CO2 emissions (top) vs. vulnerability (bottom). Source: Skeptical Science
The disproportionate role of countries adds another complication to the climate crisis - one that involves geopolitics. Enabling developing countries to achieve sustainable economic growth is vital, and developed countries must do more to facilitate their transitions. Incentivizing renewable energy sources and emissions trading schemes should be the main priority. These solutions can be carried out far faster and more efficiently than technology-based solutions like carbon capture and storage or geoengineering. Wealthier countries taking on more of this burden will experience an expensive and cumbersome challenge. However, price shouldn't be a problem if your government can afford over $800 billion per year to be funnelled into the hands of defence contractors. It is up to developed countries to lead in reducing their emissions and set a good example. After all, we are in such a predicament because of these countries and their governments' disregard for the environment.
While a global transition into renewables will be expensive, it’s a far cheaper alternative than allowing climate change to continue unabated. Policy adjustments like reducing the military budget or implementing higher tax rates on the wealthy are just two options to raise the money necessary. The wealth gap is also an emissions gap, so higher taxes on those who contribute to climate change is a more than fair arrangement, especially given how much the ultra-rich have enriched themselves since the pandemic.
How do we Begin to Fix the Mess?
Many developing countries are also historical colonies and have been devastated by the resulting instability: wars, sanctions, and debt crises also often benefit Western countries such as the US and UK, adding more complexity to how we should best approach a global plan.
Interestingly, the first marked impact on the Earth’s atmospheric CO2 concentration was due to the arrival of European settlers in the Americas. The genocide of the native populations and the spread of diseases led to a huge decline in population. The subsequent regrowth of trees sucked CO2 back out of the atmosphere. This led to a sudden decline in atmospheric CO2, known as the Orbis Spike, recorded in the GISP-2 Greenland Ice Core. This boundary is a possible candidate to mark the onset of the Anthropocene epoch, as it is now a part of the geologic record.
Again, the overlapping between social, political, economic, and environmental issues is hard to ignore but due to its complexity it has been swept under the rug and, while acknowledged by the G7 countries, little has been done to protect developing countries who are already beginning to feel the impact of climate change-related disasters.
Reparations are often discussed in the context of slavery and European colonization as one way for Western countries to undo some of the damage tethered to their past. However, things can get messy quickly. How much do countries owe for past damages? Who pays who? How best should they be paid to ensure that everyone in the receiving country benefits? It is a multifaceted, complicated issue that requires a lot of consideration, yet sustainable development could be one way.
Solutions to the climate crisis are difficult to wrap our heads around due to so many political and social barriers that come into play.
Accountability
COVID-19 has shown us the danger posed by an anti-science cult that has gained popularity in recent years and is rooted in well-funded propaganda from right-wing think tanks like the Heartland Institute. The misrepresentation of science has been a major issue for decades now. It is ruthless, organised, and seemingly has infinitely financial backing. There is a lot of damage to undo to get people on board with the sweeping changes necessary to address the inequality at the heart of climate change. We have historically undervalued nature and the benefits of a thriving, healthy environment that should transcend short-term profits. Solutions should emphasise punitive action against oil companies and their executives, who have knowingly left a trail of harm across the developing world.
Furthermore, oil corporations should be held accountable by establishing ecocide as international law. Those corporations proved to have known about climate change decades ago, such as ExxonMobil and Total, should also be retroactively penalised for a clearly criminal act. These legal actions can enable some financing back into developing countries that have been exploited for generations and help them reinvest into sustainable economic growth.
A vital first step would be for the US and UK to acknowledge their role in creating the crisis through actions. Accepting more climate refugees while taking the lead in the global response by taking on Green New Deal-like plans will show that they are serious about combating climate change. Turning empty words into action is the only way we should move forward to ensure justice.
Most US Democrats, including the current president, oppose the Green New Deal, as do many conservatives in power in the UK who routinely vote against measures aimed at improving environmental quality in their own country, let alone on the global stage. Driving progress within the current political and economic system we have built will be our biggest challenge.
The Failed Experiment
Since the era of Reagan and Thatcher, the Overton window has shifted further and further to the right, to the point where the current US president is essentially an 80s or 90s Republican on economic policy. Yet, he is still lamented as a communist by the opposing party, whose voter base seems to be from another planet. When deregulation and tax cuts for the mega-rich have been at the forefront of policy making for so long, it becomes inevitable that the large corporations consolidate power. Lobbying, loosening controls against money in politics, dismantling unions, and pumping out propaganda (often shifting the blame onto marginalised groups) all serve this purpose. In the famous words of American comedian George Carlin, “it’s a big club and you ain’t in it.” And when the country that does this is the leading emitter historically, it is worrying that it is heading in the wrong direction and setting a dangerous precedent. The events surrounding COVID gave us a stark warning that an enormous percentage of the US is willing to embrace conspiracy theory and anti-science, with the rest begrudgingly voting for an incompetent, lesser of two evils president. This is fascism unfolding before our eyes in the country we most need to fix up for the sake of the planet, and its timing couldn't be worse.
In a globalised society, it is unfortunate that such a vital movement hinges on the act of one country, but it's a reality we must face.
The recently published new instalment of the IPCC report is clear that large-scale action must be taken now to limit warming to within the 2° target by 2100, set during the Paris Agreement – the main target of 1.5° already seems beyond reach given the amount of time spent denying, deflecting and ignoring the climate crisis at the behest of oil companies and their investors. Global-scale reform appears to be the only way to ensure that the future world population can thrive and prosper. It's up to wealthy countries, politicians, and corporations to take responsibility and acknowledge the debt they owe to the rest of the world.
Yorumlar