COP15: The Road to El Dorado

Op-ed  |  01.09.10   By Adaora Mbelu

Looking through the history books, there is an unchanging constant, the fact that every new generation ushers in a hectic and complicated global issue – whether social, political, economic, or environmental.

For years, nations have gathered in several places, at several points in time in an effort to solve “World Issues” – Global Poverty Eradication, Corruption control, Nuclear Power, Narcotics, and Immigration and Asylum matters are amongst the few. The list of issues is so vague that some countries even set up committees to discuss “Global repercussions for greedy countries that do not do what I ask”.

It seems that the word of this millennium is “GLOBAL”. Global Economy, Global Energy, Global Finance, and recently the most common message preached – “Global Change”.

I am forced to ponder exactly what is changing. Perhaps the most prominent being, a significant change in climate patterns, due to an increase in the greenhouse effect resulting especially from pollution, this phenomenon also known as Global Warming, a definition though symbolically superfluous and literally garrulous still remains of serious importance in our world.

A change that “threatens the fearful in worries that things may get worse, a change that is encouraging to the hopeful because things may get better” and most significantly, a change that justified the gathering of around 200 countries, over 100 world leaders, climatologists, environmental experts and scientists in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark to discuss how to save the earth from the looming catastrophe occasioned by global warming.

GLOBAL WARMING & THE AFRICAN CONTINENT

Global warming is caused mostly by the emission of greenhouse gases, largely from industrial production, agriculture, transportation and material consumption.

Studies have shown that African nations in particular are the least responsible for carbon emissions (around 4 per cent of the world total), yet however suffer disproportionately from the dire consequences, which puts their health, agriculture, water resources, and environment in grave danger.

Nigeria

• Total contribution of carbon emissions (0.79 percent, an estimation of 2.1 metric tons/person.)
• Land use charge and Forestry (40 per cent of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions)
• Gas flaring (30 per cent)
• Transport (20 per cent)
• Electricity and other energy sources (9 per cent)
• Industrial processes (1 per cent).

Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators

According to the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the greenhouse emissions caused by the more industrialized nations could spell disaster for the millions of people in Africa. Changes in the amount and distribution of rainfall would affect crops and animals alike.

It is easy for the world to ignore all warnings and debunk scientific claims regarding the issue. However, we must realize that trivializing a critical issue that needs urgent action, will not postpone judgment day.

In the words of the famous mathematician and philosopher, Rene Descartes, “Dubito Ergo Cogito, Cogito ergo sum – I doubt, therefore I think, I think therefore I am.”

Indeed “Modest doubt is the beacon of the wise,” but I am sure Descartes, seeing the reduction in rainfall in the semi-arid Sahel region south of the Sahara desert, would not doubt the pollution that has caused the ice-cap on Mount Kilimanjaro to shrink more than 80 percent since 1900 or the fact that over 50 percent of East Africa’s coral reefs have died as a result of “bleaching,” thus affecting fisheries, food security, marine biodiversity, and tourism income.

Further studies indicate that the Northwestern and southern Africa will have the hardest hit from Global warming, with some of the most serious effects striking Botswana and South Africa and a significant decrease in water availability could occur across about 25 percent of the continent.

Is the world truly ignorant of the seriousness of this matter or do the layers of reasoning and the tiring processes just complicate the simple understanding of the situation?

In other words scientists don’t bother to explain on one hand, and world leaders don’t bother to listen on the other hand, because quite frankly there are a million and one other issues to deal with.

It is becoming apparent that further delay will amount to not only trivializing a critical issue that demands urgent action, but postponing doomsday.

SUGGESTION VS SOLUTION

A large number of African governments have been overlooked in the UN climate process thus stirring concern among the many affected.

During a discussion about the disproportionate effects that global warming is having on African nations, Nobel Peace prize winner, and executive director for Climate Network Africa, Grace Akumu stated that “There’s not much Africa can do — unless other countries cut their greenhouse emissions, our efforts will be undercut.

Despite being the least emitter of greenhouse gases responsible for the climate change problem – 3 to 4 percent of the global total – and now seriously threatened by the negative impacts of climate change, Africa remains the least recipient of climate change funds and technologies.”

On December 7th 2009,  leaders from various nations of the world gathered for a two-week  United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to discuss and agree  a new round of radical action to combat climate change beyond 2012, when the Kyoto targets for cutting green house gases (GHG) emissions in richer countries, by an average of 5.2 per cent, expires.

Also on the agenda for discussion, was a new mechanism to create funding opportunities for Africa, by rewarding countries that prevent deforestation – a primary contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.

In an effort to ensure the success of this new development, Nigeria and other vulnerable African countries accepted to rise to the occasion setting up public workshops to educate and encourage their citizens to cultivate behavior that would help achieve low carbon emissions.

In Nigeria, negotiators drawn from the Ministry of Environment, Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, and stakeholder groups on environment met to organize and strategize for the conference. The Minister of Environment, John Odey, stressed the seriousness of the meeting, and the aim of achieving a steady position for Nigeria and the African continent.

“Mr. President has personally asked me to urge you all to move into the negotiation with great zeal and candor. Nigeria will give this team a strong political backing to ensure that we have a deal. You must remember that this negotiation is about our lives, about the lives of our children and about the continued survival of humanity and our strategic national development.”

There were discussions of halted gas flaring in the oil fields of the Niger Delta, stopped bush burning, and aggressive tree planting campaigns, as the country is currently suffering from steadily rising water levels along the coastal areas and erosion.

In reality, we are simply not doing enough.

Nigeria must use this as an opportunity to create green jobs. We cannot say we’re fighting global warming while our economy is wholly based on the Oil and Gas sector.

Why can’t we build wind farms in windy Jos and solar panels in Sunny Sokoto? This will both create jobs and create alternative forms of energy.

Lets not even talk about the lack of emission standards in our automobiles.

THE OUTCOME

The Copenhagen conference has been described by attendees, as a disappointment. Based on the critical reviews that the conference has been receiving thus far, it is natural to assume that the media will have a filled day shedding light on the attending nation’s failure to unite on an issue of such great importance.

However, reality shows that the subject matter has received little attention in the past weeks.

The outcome of the Copenhagen talks was a political agreement that included quantified targets and timetables, or in layman’s terms – “an agreement to try to come to an agreement in the not-too distant future”.

Copenhagen was set up to finalize a global agreement on emission cuts following the launch of the Bali Road Map in 2007.

The action required was for industrialized nations–who over the years have been heating up the ozone layer, causing climate change, and emitting the highest percentage of greenhouse gases, to pledge a reduction in emissions through a legally binding global agreement.

The two week event ended with an agreement, drawn up by leaders of the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa, described as the “Copenhagen Accord”.

This accord was neither rejected nor accepted, but was “noted” by all of the 192 states represented at Copenhagen, which implies that the countries party to the UNFCCC may choose whether or not to adopt it. (Note: The two major polluters of the world are the United States of America and China).

Ironically, the same leaders who refused to agree to the required action presented at the conference are the ones who constantly deliver talks on climate change being one of the greatest threats humanity faces. Perhaps it was the fear of standing up to the threats of powerful lobby threat groups, or mere selfishness.

In the end, the big industry players might have found their way out of fulfilling their environmental and social responsibility, but in the words of the wise “Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear.”

Share it