A Green Degree Blog: New Angles On Sustainability

June 20th 2012

Rio+20: One Big Melee Of Motives & Morals Going Nowhere

Let me just start this post by explicitly stating my views on the upcoming Rio+20 convention, set to kick off later today in Brazil, which may hold the keys to a future radically different from our current one, either for the bad or good. I wholeheartedly hope and wish that something good comes from this meeting of leaders, that a proper binding agreement, with goals, punishments and harsh realities, one that actually kicks our lazy society into gear truly does rise from the ashes and usher in a new day; I would love nothing more than for this to be accomplished, and I have always thought this.

However, whilst hoping for this, I believe in an entirely different outcome - that nothing useful, meaningful or optimistic will result from Rio+20, or any future global event, and that not only will it simply prove to be a stage for multiple nations to bicker and fight for three days straight, but will also prove to give nothing towards to the future we want.

I nurture this gut feeling from past experience and current knowledge of the structure of such conventions on environments, energy and development. Most, if not all of the past +whatever conventions have resulted in absolutely squat, with the Kyoto Protocol the only real agreement I’ve seen which may have actually made a difference to our global society, and even that is set to die this winter without any hope of a successor. Add to this the fact that multiple powerful nations, of which I feel I do not have to name, have continually proven to be like children stubbornly refusing to go to bed, blocking all hope of a unifying agreement on anything from carbon emissions to green job investment. None of this has changed this year.

In my opinioin, when Rio+20 finally opens it’s door to its many leaders and closes it behind them, all that will proceed will be a mad scramble to see who can shout the loudest, point the straightest finger and pull the angriest face. Think of it this way; when you have some of the most powerful people in the current political and economical sphere, all whom harbour untold morals, ethics, hidden motives and plans under their bonnets, and who have all their life grown up not listening to others but actively seeking to control them, it is daft not to think nothing whatsoever will be accomplished. Continuing with this notion, it is not hard to stretch the imagination to the point where it is simply children fighting over a candy bar.

To take us back down to earth once again, consider this approach. Some leaders will want clear goals on emission reductions, such as Europe and Japan, some want advances in renewable energy investment and green sector growth, some want CCS and natural has to take centre stage, whilst others simply want to end the whole thing there and then and go back to their fossil fuel rich lands without legal requirement to stop pillaging them. You cannot expect to put so many powerful voices against one another and expect a resoundingly democratic response to come out of it, and that is the horribly unfortunate truth of the matter, one I’ve tried to ignore for so long.

Thinking along these lines, it staggers me to think how anything ever got done through this mass gathering process, and yet progress of a small calibre has been made in some areas. REDD+ was at least recognised and drafted in the mid-noughties, Kyoto set tough but realistic emission goals and the backing of giants such as US and China finally came on board to at least listen to the rest of the world in the past several conventions. These made future gathering look like ever closer to the final ‘this is it’ moment, when a real, legally binding, sustainable agreement would be ratified by all involved. But here lies the problem. Every time one fails to achieve what it set out to do so, everyone simply shouts that the next one is when it will really happen, and that waiting another year for something to result is perfectly acceptable, despite the ravaging the environment undergoes during this time.

This time however is looking just as bleak as the last, with many nations causing trouble across the entire board. The US has effectively rewritten the initial draft in favour of vague terms and practically pointless prose, whilst the UK has ruined its own climate policies and energy roadmaps with slashes in prices and restrcutrings entirely unnecessary. Couple this with the current economic crisis, elections and Euro woes keeping Obama and Cameron from even attending the talks, and highly destructive logging and fossil fuel practices in Brazil, the host nation for the damn convention, and we have a perfect storm of absolutely zero progress in any direction.

Despite this, there is perhaps a glimmer of hope. This year, the talks are party to the first attempt by a globalised social network of concerned citizens and supporters to actively influence decisions on the global stage. The endfossilfuelsubsidies Twitterstorm, Avaaz, 350, Rio+Social and multiple other outlets have all acted together to slam home how much this means to the global society, and that we desperately want our voices heard by each and every leader.

Alongside this, more and more nations now recognise the extreme threat that warming climates, rising seas, carbon emissions and biome degradation really carry, and with the science only getting stronger, there is less room for them to squirm around in and avoid the real issues. Perhaps, with a determined and combined pincer attack by the socially active public and the obvious knowledge that we have screwed with our planet for too long, something may actually come from Rio+20, just something.

I’m certainly not thinking of anything truly legally binding and goal-setting, but just maybe, a draft which demonstrates that our global leaders, the rich who hold the power to change how we treat this world, have listened for once, and considered what their public have to say. For me personally, a true decision on redirecting fossil fuel subsidies into renewable investment is my highest of priorities. The only thing that rides higher than this, is that we finally realise that by flunking this convention, we cannot hope to believe the next one will be ‘it’, because it won’t be. We are rapidly running out of time for these events to be occurring, so something must be done now.

Posted at 10:17am and tagged with: Rio+20, Rio, Rioplusocial, Debate, Economy, Politics, Ban ki moon, UN, China, US, emissiions, Fossil fuels, Energy, Global, Development, Future we want, Subsidies, Carbon, Future, Sustainability, Twitter,.

April 25th 2012

Should Climate Change Be Elevated To A Human Rights Issue?

I read an article recently written by Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food (via the Guardian) in which he outlined how the issue of climate change, and the myriad critical, human-related problems associated with it, should be brought up to the status of a human rights issue - by damaging our climate and endangering our societies, we are actively ignoring a basic human right. Well that’s the premise at least.

As we all know, climate change, whether it be natural or man-made, or more than likely a complex combination of both, is directly affecting every human on the globe and is a severe problem we are in desperate need of fixing.

The advent of multiple climate conventions and meetings of world powers began decades ago and still continues on today, but they’re becoming more and more like a session in the House of Commons or a high-school debate than a truly successful stage for solving the issues. Each nation leader has their own opinion and they’re not afraid to shout it loudly to the rest of the world, most of the time in contention with almost everyone else in the room.

We are quick to finger those developed and rapidly developing states which act almost to stagger climate decisions, such as Canada, the US or China to name a few, but in all reality, it’s the whole crowd. As De Schutter suggests in his article, “does this mean that democracy has failed, and must be sacrificed for authoritarian solutions?”. While it may seem that our democratic way of debating and considering things has done little to affect response to climate change, I feel it is still a premature idea to condemn the process altogether just yet.

The idea of branding the climate issue as a human rights issue thus stems from this, as these rights are global, powerful and upheld by almost every country on the planet, although there is plenty of scope for local tweaks and bending of the rules for evil. However, in a broad sense, De Schutter believes it will bring about a hyper-democratic approach, as climate change affects all those other human rights in which so many depend upon - water, food, electricity, sanitation and development.

Posted at 1:33pm and tagged with: human rights, UN, poverty, food, water, shortage, electricity, energy, development, human, climate change, emissions, developed, democracy, sanitation, charity, NGO, law, government,.