By Chris Davey
The concept of planetary boundaries was established by Swedish scientist Johan Rockström. Briefly, the idea is that there are some systems and processes that we need to keep an eye on because pushing our exploitation of these too far will result, ultimately, in an unliveable planet. Rockström and his colleagues at the Potsdam Institute have defined nine of these. We have just crossed one of them, acidification of the oceans. That was the seventh one that we have exceeded. So seven of them gone. So far. What to do?
The issue of personal vs societal responsibility to take action on climate breakdown reminds me of one of the arguments that was around when I worked for an international development charity in the 1980s. Some folks said we were wasting our time fiddling about with odd villages in Africa, helping the people to put up school buildings, digging wells etc, as this was just tinkering. What we really needed was a global redistribution of wealth to ensure social and economic justice and a decent life outcome for all. I had no argument with that. The trouble was that while we were waiting for that golden age to arrive, millions of people in the global South were living in poverty and (mostly children) dying of malnutrition and preventable disease. So we worked on the principle that it was “better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness” (in fact that was often quoted in the organisation).
In my view, the same applies to the climate issue. I would very much prefer that we abandoned our 19th/20th century thinking on economics – the quest for unlimited growth as expressed by gross domestic product (GDP), and instead, as Kate Raworth suggests with her concept of doughnut economics, pursue an economic system that allows us all to thrive. But in the meantime, I’m glad that I decided to have solar panels on my roof, that I haven’t eaten meat since 1983 (a decision totally unrelated to climate issues, as that was not really “a thing” in 1983), and that I drive electric. Oh yes, and somewhat to the dismay of others in my family, I refuse to fly, so any holidays in sunny (but increasingly on fire/flooded) southern Europe have to begin with a Eurostar journey to Paris/Lille/Brussels.
I know that my efforts won’t stop climate breakdown, and that applies to any individual action on anything. But if only it were multiplied enough times, with people at the same time letting our “leaders” know that this is important, and they have been asleep at the wheel for far too long, then change might happen. Leading climate expert Mike Berners-Lee certainly thinks the concept of personal carbon footprint is valid, as in his book How Bad Are Bananas? — the carbon footprint of everything. So I’m convinced we should make personal changes to reduce our own climate impact, as well as telling governments how we feel about the problem.
So here we are almost at COP time again; indeed “again” for the 29th time, as this is COP30. For three decades the great and good (!) have been getting together and talking about what should be done about climate breakdown. To borrow a phrase from Greta Thunberg, there has been a lot of “blah blah blah” (and not enough “do do do”), the result of which is NO reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. You might feel motivated to express some disappointment at thirty years of failure (barring a small blip thanks to a certain coronavirus); if so, then let our delegates know. The Prime Minister at the time of writing may or may not attend COP30; but Ed Miliband will attend, which is hardly surprising as he’s Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.
I wonder what they will all “decide”… I’m hoping for the best, but fearing the worst. As a backdrop, it’s official that renewables have at last overtaken coal as the primary energy source for electricity generation worldwide. Now anything that indicates the continuing rise of renewables is good news. But it also means that until recently, coal, beloved by some as “beautiful clean coal” (in fact the dirtiest fossil fuel, except for lignite, which is “brown coal”) has remained our primary source fuel for electricity generation. So it’s now in second place, not yet that far behind. And remember that not all energy usage is to generate electricity. Overall, the world’s energy is still 86% derived from fossil fuels. We sure have a long way to go.
I’ve written before about Roman Krznaric’s excellent The Good Ancestor, a thoughtful and thought-provoking book about how we should be thinking about the wellbeing of those who will follow us. The same basic idea is dramatically and powerfully expressed by “Louise” at We The Hopeful.
************************************************************
Sources include:
Bon Pote, https://bonpote.com/ (in French and English)
Potsdam Institute: (full explanation of planetary boundaries on the Potsdam Institute website).
Less Is More, by Jason Hickel
The Good Ancestor, by Roman Krznaric
earth.org
