Newsletter
Euros du Village
Gli Euros
Die Euros
The Euros
Los Euros
Ajouter un commentaireHackers, with suspect timing, made available last week private conversations among leading climate experts. According to some interpretations, which were also reported by the Wall Street Journal, these conversations proved that the international scientific community has colluded to exclude the “dissident climatologists” that don’t agree with the man-made origin of climate change.
These controversies, in my opinion, will have a minimal impact on the output of the Copenhagen Conference. The decisions of the meeting will be mostly based on a complex web of interests and incentives, of both the political and economic variety. Machiavelli-like logic will influence the debate and ‘realpolitik’ will be the true driver of proceedings, not concern for melting glaciers .
Therefore, regarding the core themes, we think that supporters of sustainable development today have a significant range of strong arguments. Among these arguments, the “let’s-save-the-polar-bear” one is definitely ranked low on their list.
Economic recovery
First strong argument : we need to stabilize economic recovery. The crisis has already pushed many Western governments to invest in R&D and particularly in renewable energies. According to his 2010 budget President Obama is to invest 3.5 billion dollars in the Energy Department, $3 billion more in the National Science Foundation and $830 million in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. These figures are part of a broader investment plan of $142 billion , in addition to the $162 billion already invested during 2009. In times of crisis, funding research and renewable energy turn into key enablers of economic recovery. The EU, with the Lisbon Strategy, aimed at spending 3% of its GDP on R&D by 2010, although right now it is stuck at 1.85%, but the EU institutions are writing a “EU 2020 Strategy” that is intended to re-launch the targets.
Energy independency
Second good argument : energy independency. The US does not like depending on the Middle East to make their SUVs go round. The EU does not like starting complicated negotiations with Russia every autumn to guarantee its much-needed gas supply. As the recent history of international relations tells us,from the war in Iraq to the South Ossetia and Abkhazia crisis, the energy issue always has broad and significant implications from a geopolitical standpoint. But this problem not only concerns Europe or America. In Japan, since the oil price shock of the 70s, they have been investing heavily in environmental technologies. The result ? Not bad, it seems : Japan produces hybrid vehicles (with a 50% saving when you fill up your car) and exports them worldwide. Likewise with photovoltaic panes, where Japanese products prove to be the most efficient and perform the best.. As a side-note : the Japanese aim to cut their emissions by 25% by 2020, even better than the European benchmark stated in the Climate Package.
A green economy is a pragmatic solution
Third argument : a green economy is a pragmatic solution to create new markets (and to make money). Dominique Nora, a French journalist, reports in his book Les pionniers de l’or vert that those at the forefront of renewable energy research are in Silicon Valley. Weren’t they the guys who invented funny internet applications ? “The whole of Silicon Valley – explains Nora in an interview to Le Monde – is investing in the new frontier of capitalism : renewable energies, networks and environmental technologies”. It is not by chance that European telecoms and electronic communications operators mobilized their resources on this issue. In 2009, the ETNO Association (Europe’s telecoms and electronic communications operators) estimated that full exploitation of ICT could lead to carbon emission reductions of 7.8Gt CO2 by 2020. This is through investment in communication networks that change of our ways of operating, living, working, learning and travelling. Will a green economy really save capitalism ?
The European Union, having launched the EU 2020 Strategy consultation a few weeks ago, has possibly interiorized the concepts outlined above. The aim, according to what we read in the Commission’s documents, is to create “a new sustainable social market economy, a smarter, greener economy, where prosperity will come from innovation”. The direction seems the right one : once the Strategy is approved, both industry and NGOs will wait for concrete signals in terms of budget and policies.
Finally, we can say that the most useful and solid alliances for those who want to fight against climate change are in the business sector. The ICT industry, telecommunications, photovoltaic producers, Japanese car manufacturers selling hybrid vehicles or European manufacturers selling cars in California are some of the actors that have interests compatible with climate change. It is important to be aware of it and to invest in the right alliances to bring about effective change. The polar bear will thank us.
References :
European Commission, Consulation on the future EU 2020 Strategy, COM (2009) 647/3, Novembee 2009
Riccardi Ferdinando, Il trittico clima-popolazione-lotta alla fame pone il problema del posto dell’umanità al mondo, Bulletin Quotidien Europe, 27.11.2009
Antoine Reverchon et alii, Les politiques d’innovation cherchent un nuveau élan in Le Monde – Dossier economie, 24.11.2009
Dyer and Harvey, China sets targets for greenhouse emissions, Financial Times, p.6, 27.11.2009
Al Gore and David Blood, Time is up for short-term capitalism, Financial Times, p.22, 27.11.2009
Johnson Keith, Climate emails show scientists’ strains, The Wall Street Journal, p.3, 23.11.2009
Photo : Flickr, Goandgo
Ajouter un commentaire
La Realpolitik a Copenaghen
(1)
