Global Warming & Economic Behavior
By Denise Best | Related entries in Blogging, Environment, In The NewsPutting aside the debate on the degree of legitimacy involving global warming predictions itself, let’s take a gander at a rather fundamental point at the heart of any potential change in energy policy and mindset.
Today, in the middle of new global warming talks in Montreal, there is a sense that the whole idea of global agreements to cut greenhouse gases won’t work.
A major reason the optimism over Kyoto has eroded so rapidly is that its major requirement – that 38 participating industrialized countries cut their greenhouse emissions below 1990 levels by the year 2012 – was seen as just a first step toward increasingly aggressive cuts.But in the years after the protocol was announced, developing countries, including the fast-growing giants China and India, have held firm on their insistence that they would accept no emissions cuts, even though they are likely to be the world’s dominant source of greenhouse gases in coming years.
A standoff occurs then with emerging countries on their willingness to adjust policy and behavior.
As Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, a proponent of emissions targets, said in a statement on Nov. 1: “The blunt truth about the politics of climate change is that no country will want to sacrifice its economy in order to meet this challenge.”
This is as true, in different ways, in developed nations with high unemployment, like Germany and France, as it is in Russia, which said last week that it may have spot energy shortages this winter.
Some veterans of climate diplomacy and science now say that perhaps the entire architecture of the climate treaty process might be flawed.
Economic pressures, and realities, need to be part of any energy initiative – to not take into account this crucial element is indeed a flawed way of evaluating the situation.
The only real answer at the moment is still far out on the horizon: nonpolluting energy sources. But the amount of money being devoted to research and develop such technologies, much less install them, is nowhere near the scale of the problem, many experts on energy technology said.
As with any change in behavior, there has to be an incentive.
So, what’s the incentive for a change in energy policy and greater attention to alternate (nonpolluting) energy sources?
This entry was posted on Monday, December 5th, 2005 and is filed under Blogging, Environment, In The News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
December 7th, 2005 at 3:24 am
So, what’s the incentive for a change in energy policy and greater attention to alternate (nonpolluting) energy sources?
ummm, like, binding emissions targets maybe? Perhaps like Kyoto tried to start? This really isn’t all that tricky. An emissions target gives countries to implement first best solutions like a carbon tax (new zealand) or take other steps in accordance with local conditions. No one said enforcing it or getting agreement on it was going to be easy, but it is fundamentally the right route.