Monday, January 01, 2018

Can We Change Climate Change?


T
he Paris’ Agreement was adopted by the 195 participating countries, of which 171 have already subscribed to the treaty, in just two years. Which is fine, except that the treaty is just a collection of good wishes, without any concrete commitment. it does not set up specific and verifiable engagements. Every country will set its own targets and will be responsible for its implementation. It is like to ask all citizens of a country to decide which laws they wish to obey and leave to them to comply, without any possible sanction.

Europe pledged in Paris in 2015, to reach 27% of renewable energies by scaling down the use of fossils, fixing a target of 20% for 2020. Well, from 27%, it went down to 24.3% and decided to keep subsidies for the fossils industry, until 2030 instead of 2020, as planned. And while the proposal of the Commission was that fossil fuel power plants would lose subsidies if they did not cut their emissions to 500 grams of CO2 per ton by 2020, the ministers extended subsidies until 2025. The Commission proposed to cut biofuels (fuels made with products for human consumption, like palm oil) to 3.8%. Well, the ministers, decided to raise that to almost double - 7%.

The International Panel on Climate Change, have reached a definitive conclusion: the only way to stop the planet deteriorating more rapidly, emissions should not exceed 1.5 centigrade over what was the Earth’ temperature in 1850. In other words, our planet is deteriorating already, and we cannot revert that. We have emitted too much gas and pollution, that are at work already. But by halting this process, we can stabilize it, but never cancel what we did cause, at least for thousands of years. The scientists concluded was that if we went over 1,5 centigrade, we would irreversibly cross a red line: we will not be able to change the trend, and climate will be out of control, with very dramatic consequences for the planet. Instead, the Paris agreement decided to put as a goal not the 1,5 centigrade as a target, but 2 centigrade.

The scientific consensus is that we have already passed the 1.5 centigrade. And the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), has estimated that the engagements taken by the countries in Paris, if not changed, will bring us to 6 centigrade, an increase that according to the scientific community would make a large part of the earth inhabitable. We are now emitting 400 particles of CO2 per million, when the red line was considered 350 particles PM. 

2017 has seen the highest record of emissions in history, because they have reached 41.5 gigatons. Of those, 90% comes from activities related to human actions, while renewables still cover only 18% of the energy consumed in the world. 

At this very moment, we spend $10 million per minute, to subsidize the fossils industry. Just counting direct subsidies, they are between $775 billion to $1 trillion, according to the UN. The official figure just in the G20 is $444 billion. But then, the International Monetary Fund accepted the economists’ view that subsidies are not only cash: it is the use of the earth and society, like destruction of soil, use of water, political tariffs (the so-called externalities, the cost which exists but are external to the budget of the companies). If we do that, we reach the staggering amount of $5.3 trillion: they were $4.9 trillion in 2013. That is 6.5% of the global Gross National Product…and that is what it costs to governments, society and earth, to use fossils.

 Trump wants to reopen the mines because the fossils industry is a strong backer of the Republican party. The billionaire Koch brothers, the largest owners of coal mines in the US, have declared that they have spent 800 million dollars in the last electoral campaign. Someone might say: these things happen in the US but according to the respected Transparency International, there are over 40.000 lobbyists in Europe, working to exercise political influence. The Corporate Europe Observatory, which studies the financial sector, found out that it spends just in Brussels $120 million a year, and employs 1.700 lobbyists. It found that they lobbied against regulations, with more than 700 organizations, which outnumbered trade unions and civil society organizations, by a factor of seven. The power of the fossils industry explains why in 2009 governments helped the sector with $557 billion dollars, and only $43 to 46 billion dollars to all renewable industry.

In a 2015 poll, with the participation of 9.7 million people, they were asked to choose as their priorities six themes out of 16. The first of the themes presented was climate change. Well, the first one chosen, with 6.5 million of preferences, was “a good education”. The second and third, with over 5 million of preferences, were “a better health system”, and “better opportunities for work”. The last of the 16 themes, with less than 2 million, was the “climate change.“ And this was also in the preferences of the least developed countries, who are going to be the major victims of climate change. If people are not aware, and therefore don't care why should the politicians be concerned? The lobbyist s fighting for the fossil fuel interests have accomplished their task well.

Finally, there is the very important issue, that in Paris the agreements were entirely about the reduction of emissions by the fossils’ industry. Other emissions were left entirely out such as the livestock industry which impacts on climate change. Animals emit not CO2, but methane which is at least 25 % more damaging than C02. There is recognition by the UN, that while all means of transportation, from cars to planes, contribute to 13% of emissions, cows do with 18%.

But the real problem is their use of water. People worldwide, use one-tenth of what cows need.  One pound of beef uses 2.500 gallons of water (that means that a hamburger is the equivalent of two months of showers) And to have 1 gallon of milk, you need 100 gallons of water.

Cattle use 33% of all water, 45% of the earth, and are the cause of 91% of the Amazon deforestation. They also produce waste 130 times more than human beings. Pig raising in the Netherlands is creating serious problems because theirs waste acidity is reducing usable land.  Consumption of meat is increasing in Asia and Africa.


The total food production worldwide could feed 13 to 14 billion people. Of this, a considerable part goes to waste, perhaps as much as a third, and does not reach people. But the food for animals could feed 6 billion people when we already have up to a billion people going hungry. We have enough resources for everybody. This is proof that we cannot administer them rationally. The logical solution in the interest of the planet and of humankind is socialism, the end of the exchange economy and production solely for profit, and an end to all the buying and selling of the market system.

Taken from

No comments: