I just read a commentary published in the May 31st edition of CSE's publication Down to Earth criticizing the Sierra Club's involvement in India.
The author, Nidhi Jamwal, makes a bizarre logical leap that the Sierra Club's creation of a "Green Livelihoods Award" is further evidence that the developed world is projecting India as a "villain of climate change." I am sure the author recognizes the severity of the challenge humanity faces from climate change. The fact is, mitigating climate change is not an either/or option. ALL countries must commit to aggressively fighting climate change, and exploring EVERY possible channel for reducing emissions. Bravo to the Sierra Club for its willingness to share its organizational capacity, contacts and more than 100 of experience in environmental activism with India.
It is incredibly myopic to think that India need do nothing to fight climate change because the responsibility lies with developed countries. Recent research from the Center for Global Development shows that even without the historical emissions from developed countries, the global South is on a dangerous and unsustainable emissions path that would lead to a dangerous temperature rise if unchecked. This "business as usual" attitude is even more myopic when one considers that India is projected to suffer some of the most severe impacts of climate change, including coastal inundation, glacial melting, crop failure and desertification. Who will help India then?
On another note, the author says, "By the same logic, California should be leading in the switch to green technology as it has plenty of both sun and the sea." California IS leading the switch to green technology through massive investment by Silicon Valley VCs in cleantech in the US and abroad, as well as the most aggressive clean energy policies in the US.
Finally, the author concludes that, "Since the US was the largest polluter, with the highest per capita carbon emission, it would make more sense to focus on Washington rather than on New Delhi or Beijing, I would have thought." I am sure the author recognizes that if CSE were only to focus on lobbying New Delhi, we would get nowhere. Why should the Sierra Club behave any differently than CSE would?
2 comments:
I fully accept with you Shaanti. There is this argument about "per capita emissions" which I believe is a dangerous approach in environmental issues. When the impact of pollution happens, it is the whole magnitude that counts and not the per capita.
I agree. The whole per capita approach is a politically expedient idea for a 'do nothing' strategy. Very useful for people who are fighting battles daily just to save their government but potentially very counterproductive in the medium to long term. As per UNFCC's latest report we only have about seven years in which to peak carbon emmissions and start going down before runaway climate change becomes a reality.
climate change is by no means an exact science but ignoring it altogether will be nothing short of foolhardy. The technology is evolving out there. We have potential in terms of solar and biomass. Lets start exploring its potential in earnest. The climate change policy of the country should reflect the urgent need for these initiatives
Post a Comment