Confessions of a Climate Change Fatalist

By Anna Corbett

The world is on a fast track to hell. Unless we all start turning off lights and switch to bicycles, all the polar bears will die slow, painful deaths followed swiftly by all of us. That is, if we can actually do anything about it at all/are in fact causing the problem/can find enough bicycles to stop the impending apocalypse. Presented with the conflicting and often sensationalist ramblings of the modern press, it can be difficult to know which side to come down on in the climate change debate and even whether there is actually any point in trying. With the developed world already consuming mammoth amounts of energy every day and the developing world catching up at breakneck speed, surely we are too far down the road to oblivion by now.

It was with this mindset that I was asked to attend the UEA climate summit in Gwangju to cover some of the proceedings and report back on my observations. Feeling like a huge fraud and sure that I had a large flashing sign above my head that read ‘skeptic’, I wandered around the Kim Dae-jung Convention Center. At first I saw nothing to allay my fears. Forklift trucks spewed fumes out into the crisp morning air as they maneuvered into place large displays on renewable energy and clean fuel. Delegates laden with massive files full of copies of the conference’s proceedings sipped on bottled water and chatted about the three flights they would have to take to get home in time for the weekend. The hypocrisy seemed blatant and astounding. How was this amount of carbon expenditure justifiable for a conference discussing the growing threat that cities pose to carbon emission levels? For the first time in human history, more people now live in cities than in rural areas, and by 2050, that number will rise to 75 percent.  Cities consume 75 percent of the world’s energy, produce 80 percent of its waste and are responsible for 60 percent of global carbon emissions. The purpose of this conference was to chronicle what was already being done to bring these goliaths under control and to map out a road plan to help cities progress to a zero carbon, zero waste future.

Zero waste? Before I could scribble ‘how unrealistic’ in my note book I was put in my place by Melanie Nutter, the delegate from San Francisco. That city now diverts 77 percent of its waste away from landfill sites through a mixture of recycling initiatives and a food scraps collection program which sends 300 tons of waste food to composting sites every day. And it’s not just liberal Californian cities that are making changes. Total coal and oil consumption in the US has dropped by nine percent in the last three years.  San Antonio in Texas has responded to the depletion of its ground water sources by decreasing the amount of water use in the city from 200 gallons per person per day down to 130 gallons. Outside the US, global innovation is quietly changing the way people consume energy. Here in Gwangju, 47 percent of households have voluntarily signed up to the city’s award-winning carbon banking scheme. Each family’s carbon emissions are compared on a monthly basis with those of the previous year, and reductions are rewarded with financial incentives.

While these examples are extremely encouraging, they notably come from rich, developed countries that are willing and able to spend money on innovations and new technology. How can these countries, most of which owe their current wealth to industrial revolutions and the exploitation of the world’s natural resources, possibly demand that developing countries concern themselves with environmental issues when many of their people are unable to feed themselves? After listening to delegates from Africa and India, this question appears not only moot but patronising. A recent Gallop survey conducted in India revealed that 45 percent of the population prioritised environmental conservation as the issue that most concerned them, with 35 percent choosing economic growth instead.

In Benin, climate change is leading to a lengthening of the dry season, causing failing crops that local authorities are combating by promoting reforestation to minimize surface runoff. The government of Mozambique is proceeding down a similar path with a planting program called ‘one child, one tree’. The developing world does not need to stand over these countries like anxious parents demanding that they take the issue of climate change seriously; they already are. What they need is financial backing for the grassroots initiatives that are already inspiring the population and making a difference at the local level.

In newly industrialised countries, the progress is even more promising. To me, wind power always seemed to be a tiny drop in an ocean of need with very limited potential, but China is changing all that. It is on the brink of opening seven huge wind farms, one of which is so large that it will produce enough energy to power a country the size of Poland or Egypt. The North Sea has enough wind energy potential to supply the whole of Europe. The cost of constructing wind farms is dropping and the construction itself is becoming a highly competitive market that is creating jobs and boosting the world economy. Getting excited about wind power had been an alien concept for me, but I found myself scribbling: Why the hell aren’t we already doing this?

And that, I’ve realised, is the point: it just makes sense.  If climate change is primarily man-made, which no scientific body of national or international standing currently denies (the last to switch from denial to a non-committal position was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007), then these changes will prevent flooding and droughts that are threatening global food production to such an extent that it seems likely that we will all starve to death before the sea can rise high enough to drown us. If these combined efforts don’t make a dent in the global temperature rise, they will make the air we breathe cleaner, conserve our drinking water, create jobs and encourage innovation. We may not save the polar bears, but at least we can face the apocalypse with a fresh glass of water in hand…though by then we may need something a little stronger.