World not taking climate change ticking bomb seriously
The storms, droughts and wildfires we are witnessing are too hot for comfort
AT THE Rio earth summit in 1992, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted by almost all countries. George Bush the first, leader of the free world as proclaimed by imperial capital, declared that the American way of life was not negotiable.
Nevertheless, the convention recognised the principle of combined but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), meaning that the first world had done the polluting and the third world must now catch up.
The convention relied on voluntary action by first world countries to reduce emissions first. No one volunteered.
So then there were calls for “binding” reductions which a move US then president Bill Clinton said was okay as long as it was done through the “market”.
In 1997 at Kyoto, the third conference of the parties (CoP 3) agreed to binding reductions for the first world with a “cap-and-trade” deal so that they could buy “carbon credits” on the cheap from the third world and carry on polluting.
But the “cap” on emissions wasn’t actually there and the binding targets did not actually bind.
This was just the sort of dysfunctional climate regime that suited all parties. And it brought into being a new class of scam artists suited up for business.
But then US president George Bush the second said he didn’t believe in climate change, such belief being bad for America. Better to go to war for oil.
In 2009 at Copenhagen (CoP 15), Barack Obama arrived triumphantly holding the Nobel Peace Prize while declaring that America would go to war whenever it wanted.
In a back room, he met the newly constituted BASIC group – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – and agreed the Copenhagen Accord which said global warming should be limited to 2°C and all parties should volunteer their own pledge to reduce emissions.
Parties not present in the back room loudly denounced the deal and the Copenhagen CoP broke up in disarray and dismay.
In 2010 at the Cancun summit, the delegates cheered loudly as they agreed that global warming should be limited to 2°C – and maybe 1.5 – and all parties should volunteer their own pledge to reduce emissions.
In 2011 at the Durban summit (CoP 17), they agreed to agree a new agreement. Country pledges were to be called nationally determined commitments (NDCs) – as sound as any politician’s promise.
In 2013 at Warsaw (CoP 19), the delegates found they couldn’t stomach commitments and reworded the NDCs as “nationally determined contributions”.
And so to 2015 at Paris summit
(CoP 21), the world leaders cheered themselves on as they signed the Paris Agreement: global warming should be limited to “well below” 2°C – and maybe 1.5 – and all parties should submit their NDCs.
In 2018, the science boffins made clear that 2°C will be hell on earth so we’d better aim for 1.5. Not that 1.5 will be pleasant.
Indeed, at 1.2°C now, the storms, droughts and wildfires are too hot for comfort.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump said he didn’t believe in climate change which is a Chinese hoax and didn’t make American feel great.
The Paris NDCs added up to emissions worth 3 or 4 degrees of warming. They are to be renewed with improved “contributions” every 5 years.
The year 2020 was cancelled and
the new crop of NDC’s are to be taken to Glasgow (CoP 26) in 2021. They look like adding up to 3 or 4 degrees.
And South Africa is determined to make its contribution to that end. The updated draft NDC is out for comment. It improves on its previous NDC, lifting it on the Greenfly gauge from “absolutely bloody awful” to “bloody awful”.
As always, the government says it needs to burn more coal, oil and gas to lift the people out of poverty. As if that’s worked since 1994. As if that’s what our politicians have been about.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden says “America is back”. Do you feel the relief?