Ah well, all good things must come to an end, and the circus at Copenhagen too draws to a close with a grand declaration of success by none other than the illustrious Mr Obama.
He said "The US, China, Brasil, India and South Africa have agreed to set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2 deg C and, importantly, to take action to meet this objective".
Well well well! What can anyone say to that? It just makes me fall on my knees in dazed awe at the brilliance of the achievement. Here is a group of politicians who have used scotch tape to cover the worlds wounds and made it all go away! Amazing.
Jokes apart, if you knit together the various vignettes - Australia fudging its emission figures to make them look good, the Dutch working behind the scenes to work out an alternate treaty to protect the interests of the developed world, the very crude $100 billion offer from the US with so many strings attached that it looked like the wooly mammoth, the insistence in wanting to do away with the Kyoto Protocol, all paint one simple picture. And that picture is as follows:
The world is now polarised into two - the developed part and the developing part.
The developed part is willing and able to move to a lower carbon footprint. But it does NOT want the developing world hanging around its neck.
It is also quite blase about the fact that its gross excesses in the past have created this problem. "Ok - so I raped the earth. So what? That was in the past, and you have no power over me to make me repent for it. But I promise to screw your happiness if you attempt to do what I did."
The developing part is uselessly and stupidly still shouting "Rape! Help, Please come and help us"
Grow up.
No one helps anyone else in today's dog eat dog world. People and countries just help themselves.
So to my mind this summit at Copenhagen has been a great success. Really - I mean it.
It has completely cleared the air.
The developing countries have been asking for assistance - money and technology from the developed countries in order to battle climate change, as a partial atonement for the creation of this mess.
The developed world has completely refused.
So at least that bit of the debate is settled.
Now the only reality is as that the world is still getting hotter, and each individual in each country has to do their bit to help cool it down.
The developing world needs to understand that only efficiency, innovation, reduced corruption and determination are going to see them through.
If they do not make progress in reducing their emissions, the developed world can and will impose sanctions and trade barriers on it to force it to do so.
If the developed world does not make similar progress, there is very little that can be done about it as the weak cannot force the strong. Simple law of nature.
So my advice to the developing world is to stop whimpering about the the injustice of it all and get down to work.
It is very unjust.
However, it is the only reality there is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Expecting governments to actually do any good is expecting wonders.
ReplyDeleteInjustice is as much a reality as Justice......it is another moot point that justice also is defined by those who contribute to injustice and then change their hats....to good effect.
ReplyDeleteThe key issue is economic exploitation and the Developed world needs to give back what it took long ago, in terms of natural resources and plundering of the under developed world.....maybe it will take them more time to see reason....through a two way mirror mirror
This is one of the best (and most realistic) assessment of the situation on the ground I've come across. Behind the hype and the circus, the idealism and the rhetoric, it's in the final analysis about the balance of power... and as you so succintly put it "...the weak cannot force the strong". My question is, are we saying this marks an end to all multilateral efforts?
ReplyDeleteWell said, The developed world has not really won, they are exposed. They have given teeth to developing BASIC to bite when an opportunity will come.
ReplyDeleteLet the charity begin at home.
Can one calculate how much of gas (petrol or diesel) is wasted when we the car (any auto vehicle, the old unserviced trucks in particular) crosses an Indian style speed breaker, not to mention the pot holes.
How much carbon is emiited?
We may not need biodiesel if these speed breakers and pot holes are taken care of.
Any sharp minds to do the calculations!
Mohan
Well, goverments will do what governments do - namely mis-managing, mis-representing, mis-interpreting, missing the reality and, most of all, feigning blindness to truth. Mr. Obama's stand is VERY representative of that (Oh, by the way, Anupam, shouldn't Obama be given an Oscar for the wonderful performance as the "Saviour of the world" instead of the Nobel? I guess the Oscar panel of judges has now taken over the Nobel panel).
ReplyDeleteComing back to what you said, Anupam, I wish more of us will follow suit and do what you have done - make a headstart bfor saving the earth ( i think you're a superhero for that). Meanwhile the rest of us mere mortals may STOP DRIVING ALONE to office every day, and take public conveyance - which is very inconvenient i agree but hey, what's a little rattle in the bus or autorickshaw compared to an Earth that will be like Mercury by the time our children grow up.
Also, for those of us who are swanky and "hey-we've-got-big-money-and-can-afford-big-cars", the green alternative is hybrid cars (for the uninitiated, Honda, BMW and the costlier car manufacturers make them - so Mr. Big Money, go out and buy one if you care for your children)
Lastly, and mostly, Bravo Anupam! I hope more of us can really follow suit and be superheroes like you!
Take a look at the reports "Eyewitness: How China sabotaged climate talks" (ref http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/23/2779498.htm) for how China ring-managed the Copenhagen circus and http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107604574607793378860698.html for an alternate scenario = live with it. Carbon-based energy is cheap, reducing carbon is expensive, and the effects of global warming are too diffuse to impact us. Note that we're unable to change our Indian farmers habit of depleting fossil water supplies by pumping it out for irrigation-intensive agriculture or our citizens' proclivities to dump raw sewage into our rivers. So most likely we'll be in the WSJ scenario of living with the effects of global warming.
ReplyDeleteYes Rahul, you are right - we have to live with global warming. However, as the WSJ article too points out - there may be money to be made out of developing new technologies as well as sources of energy.
ReplyDeleteTHAT is my most sincere hope - that we stop talking, and get to the long haul task of reinventing energy.
Very cool phrase, "reinventing energy" and good to pursue. So went to Google and typed it in. Got 2 interesting links, one for Jeffrey Sachs pushing for Solar, a link to a book from the American Petroleum Institute on the subject (the whole book is on GoogleBooks). The best-written stuff on this comes from Friedman, see http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/20/opinion/20friedman.html "The only engine big enough to impact Mother Nature is Father Greed: the Market"
ReplyDelete