By Peter Greaves
From the editors: Peter Greaves passed away on 16th December 2021. Peter had shared the following article for inclusion in our December Quarterly, 2021. To reach a larger audience, we are currently reprinting all articles of the December Quarterly.
Financial assistance from rich to poor countries, promised at previous COPs, is still not forthcoming. Problems of huge relevance that were not discussed at the conference included the need to shift to a near-vegetarian diet, and climate friendly agriculture, notably Conservation Agriculture, based on three principles of no-till, ground-cover, and crop diversity, which restores the life of the soil and prevents erosion, and is gathering support around the world.
There is a long way to go, as current emissions commitments imply a 2.4ºC rise, if not more – with catastrophic consequences for human life and for the survival of many animal species. So there is another chance next year, in Egypt, at COP27…
We can’t wait ‘till then. Several people inside the Glasgow conference centre pointed out that the people demonstrating outside showed much more urgency than those inside, and had many good ideas. There is a huge momentum growing around the world for civic action to promote local initiatives and to reach a point where governments are forced to take the action they have long been resisting. The indomitable Greta Thunberg announced: “The COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah. But the real work continues outside those halls. And we will never give up, ever.” At the end of episode 1 of a recent 3-part BBC documentary about her, “A Year to Change the World”, she said : “The only thing that creates hope is action. If there is no action there is no hope.”
With respect to COP26 the British Queen, now 95, is said to be irritated “by lots of talk but no action”, and Prince Charles was worried by “just talk”, and said ”The problem is to get action on the ground.” (The Guardian, 15 October).
The fossil fuel industry knew since the 1960s from its own scientists that its behaviour was influencing the climate. Since then it has been promoting denialists, until that ceased to be credible, when it shifted to deception, distraction and delay, “while keeping the oil flowing and fossil fuels burning” (Michael Mann, The New Climate War, 2021). The industry fielded 503 lobbyists to COP26, more individuals than any single country. Why is this permitted? Why has the industry been allowed to negotiate trade deals with poorer countries that enable it to sue them for lost earnings if the countries try to introduce climate friendly legislation? Many (eg: Naomi Klein) have been arguing the need for a re-think of the economic system; we need a capitalism with a human face…
At the risk of seeming disloyal I admit to thinking at times that excessive concern with SDGs can be a distraction from grappling with the overriding climate crisis.
It was James Hansen’s testimony to the US Congress in 1988 that really made global warming and its consequences widely known. The UN became involved in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio, which spawned the COPs that, to adapt Macbeth, creep in their petty pace from year to year, while the climate crisis, in Christiana Figueres words, “is hurtling towards us at terrifying speed.” At Rio a child was asked: “What would you like to be when you grow up?” The reply, even more poignant today, was “Alive”.
Children born today will be fighting each other for food and water in 2050 if the COP26 climate summit fails, exhausted delegates in Glasgow were told as the deadline for a deal passed without agreement. But further negotiations finally led to agreement being reached, on a text that, at the insistence of India and China, stated that the use of coal should be phased down, instead of phased out, as the president of the conference had wanted. The Glasgow climate pact retained the strengthened goal of limiting global heating to 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels, but was decidedly weak on actions to achieve it. There is only one way: the use of fossil fuels must be stopped altogether. The pact does not name oil and gas specifically, and although some take encouragement from the fact that coal is at least mentioned, since – incredulously – it has not been named in previous COPs, there is an important distinction between phasing down and phasing out.
Financial assistance from rich to poor countries, promised at previous COPs, is still not forthcoming. Problems of huge relevance that were not discussed at the conference included the need to shift to a near-vegetarian diet, and climate friendly agriculture, notably Conservation Agriculture, based on three principles of no-till, ground-cover, and crop diversity, which restores the life of the soil and prevents erosion, and is gathering support around the world.
There is a long way to go, as current emissions commitments imply a 2.4ºC rise, if not more – with catastrophic consequences for human life and for the survival of many animal species. So there is another chance next year, in Egypt, at COP27…
We can’t wait ‘till then. Several people inside the Glasgow conference centre pointed out that the people demonstrating outside showed much more urgency than those inside, and had many good ideas. There is a huge momentum growing around the world for civic action to promote local initiatives and to reach a point where governments are forced to take the action they have long been resisting. The indomitable Greta Thunberg announced: “The COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah. But the real work continues outside those halls. And we will never give up, ever.” At the end of episode 1 of a recent 3-part BBC documentary about her, “A Year to Change the World”, she said : “The only thing that creates hope is action. If there is no action there is no hope.”
With respect to COP26 the British Queen, now 95, is said to be irritated “by lots of talk but no action”, and Prince Charles was worried by “just talk”, and said ”The problem is to get action on the ground.” (The Guardian, 15 October).
The fossil fuel industry knew since the 1960s from its own scientists that its behaviour was influencing the climate. Since then it has been promoting denialists, until that ceased to be credible, when it shifted to deception, distraction and delay, “while keeping the oil flowing and fossil fuels burning” (Michael Mann, The New Climate War, 2021). The industry fielded 503 lobbyists to COP26, more individuals than any single country. Why is this permitted? Why has the industry been allowed to negotiate trade deals with poorer countries that enable it to sue them for lost earnings if the countries try to introduce climate friendly legislation? Many (eg: Naomi Klein) have been arguing the need for a re-think of the economic system; we need a capitalism with a human face…
At the risk of seeming disloyal I admit to thinking at times that excessive concern with SDGs can be a distraction from grappling with the overriding climate crisis.
It was James Hansen’s testimony to the US Congress in 1988 that really made global warming and its consequences widely known. The UN became involved in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio, which spawned the COPs that, to adapt Macbeth, creep in their petty pace from year to year, while the climate crisis, in Christiana Figueres words, “is hurtling towards us at terrifying speed.” At Rio a child was asked: “What would you like to be when you grow up?” The reply, even more poignant today, was “Alive”.
This article is part of the XUNICEF News and Views Quarterly Newsletter, December 2021.
Comments
Post a Comment
If you are a member of XUNICEF, you can comment directly on a post. Or, send your comments to us at xunicef.news.views@gmail.com and we will publish them for you.