Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
AS A GREEN campaigner and politician for over thirty years, each year feels like Groundhog Day.
A travelling circus of climate scientists, campaigners, and politicians travel to far-flung places to attend the Conference of the Parties (COP) to try and negotiate a plan of action to halt catastrophic and irreversible global heating. Will it be different this time around when this year’s event starts in Glasgow on Sunday? In short – yes. There is a sense of urgency in the air. Never before has there been so much public interest and media attention on this conference.
Last August, saw the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) publish a stark report. It unequivocally stated three important points: the earth’s surface is warming, this is caused by human activities, and our future will involve a global increase in average temperatures, rising sea levels and increased heat waves.
The significance of global scientific agreement on these points cannot be overstated: scientists, unlike many politicians in the vein of Mr Trump, are a cautious bunch. They are careful with their words because their careers and reputation are built on the accuracy of what they observe and predict. The scientists have done their job and told us the state of play. It is now up to the negotiators to decide on the policies to stop global emissions and map our transition to a low-emissions future.
However, to dig deeper into the second point of the report – that human activities led to global heating – is to reveal injustice. The humans who have contributed the least to global heating – those who live in the global south and those who live in poverty in wealthy countries – will be impacted the most by the climate crisis. Similarly, Covid-19 revealed that although the pandemic affected us all, the impact was and is not equally experienced by all. Addressing the injustice of the climate crisis must be central to discussions at COP26.
What can we do to ensure that the most vulnerable are protected from rising costs as our economy transitions to low-carbon policies? Home energy upgrades are one practical way to achieve this. Recently, I drafted a report for the European Parliament arguing that governments must upgrade all homes to an A-energy rating, starting with social housing.
Home energy upgrades are not as flashy as owning a Tesla. However, retrofitting our homes can be a win-win: they reduce emissions as well as protect households from fuel poverty. I am hoping that COP26 will mainstream these types of measures that are essential for climate action and protecting people.
Green campaigners are hoping that agreement will be reached on funding a Global Forest Pledge. This can help countries in the Global South maintain forests to absorb carbon dioxide, and fairly compensate those who act as caretakers for such resources. These countries are currently paying the price of inaction as extreme heat and droughts lead to crop failures and migration.
The term ‘climate refugee’ has entered the mainstream, and tragically, some who have drowned crossing the Mediterranean in flimsy boats are victims of our failures on climate. Wealthier nations including Ireland must do more to help developing countries towards a cleaner development path. I am hoping Irish Aid, the Government of Ireland’s international development aid programme, will do more in the coming years to promote clean development paths and reduce the numbers of those forced to leave their homes. In 2009 at COP15 in Copenhagen world leaders promised €100 billion to developing countries to aid their transition. That promise was not kept. Now is the time to finally deliver.
In Ireland, a Climate Act has finally made its way onto the statute books. In 2011, the Green Party’s proposal to reduce emissions by 2.5% per year failed to pass, and after a decade of inaction, we now must reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 7% a year to meet our international commitments. Taking on this challenge involves changes in the energy we consume, the way we travel, and the food we eat. Collectively the actions we take now can give us clean air, warmer homes, and allow our children the outdoor freedoms that they have lost due to rising levels of traffic.
There is no burying our heads in the sand anymore. We cannot ‘solve’ climate change: climate change is here and it is now a climate crisis. Science tells us that we are locked into a warmer world with a more erratic climate for at least thirty years. However, despite the seriousness of this situation, we are lucky to be alive during a time when the actions we take right now and during the next five years will have a transformative effect on all life on earth.
I hope that this COP marks the beginning of an ambitious decade of change, but hope alone is not enough. We must demand action from all of our leaders and governments – they are of the people and for the people. As politicians it is our duty to protect communities, and equally so, it is our duty as citizens to protect each other.
Ciarán Cuffe is Dublin’s Green MEP
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I bet they all attend after being dropped off by limo or helicopter. If the are so concerned why didn’t they reduce their own carbon footprints and hold these meetings via zoom.
I guess the journal are doing party political broadcasts now. Very strange.
@Paul Gorry: not as strange as you
@Paul Gorry: The EU gave them €350,000 a while back – articles like this are payback.
@Hugh Morris: ah the numpty pops his head in again good man hugh always available.
No
No they won’t for the wealthy but it’s going to be a complete different situation for thousands of people not been able to afford heating and electricity. 2 thousand people died in Ireland last year due to hypothermia!
The 30th Dail was dissolved in March 2011 of which at the time green td Eamon Ryan was minister of environment. Surely the proposal to reduce carbon emissions by 2.5% happened while the greens were in power. Ciaran, can you clarify? I can’t find anything on it by googling.
@Andrew Dillon: John Gormley was minister for the environment and the proposal for 2.5% p.a reductions was included in the Climate Change Response Bill 2010.
Another virtue signaller. If we need to have heat pumps, electric vehicles and all the rest, give us cheap, 24/7/365 electricity. Not subsidy harvesting, intermittent wind and solar, which all has to be backed up by something else. At long last the penny is begging to drop that instead we just need nuclear power, the new technology SMRs to be built en mass by the Military Industrial Complex worldwide, instead of submarines and all the rest. This is World War we are in, and it wont be won by killing half our cows and more bus lanes and bicycles.
We went from having a council run bin collection to a free market. Now instead of 1 truck coming down the street a week, we have 3 instead.
But things like this are hard to fix. And there are many examples like it. So its just easier to tax and blame people for their choices like eating meat, heating their homes they cant afford to insulate, driving cars because they cant afford to live in Ranelagh etc.
I dont deny we need to change, but we need revolutionary thinking on problems like the above, not death by 1000 cuts on people, who will hate it and turn against it.
Blah Blah Blah,
It. will be the quote of the decade!
Remember, when they open their mouths for the camera – Blah Blah Blah
The Greens are increasingly justified in their campaigns, here and abroad. Because it is scientific, not emotional or cultural or traditional.
One tends to disagree only because no one wants to belief that there is a climate crisis.
But it is real and it is here. So we can whine about taxes and “my back pocket” as usual or we can start to address this. We completely depend on a highly fragile ecosystem which we will not survive without.
@Derek Cawley: but what incentives have the green party brought forward? They did nothing when gormley was the leader only tax and with Ryan as the leader it’s the same thing. I would agree that we need action but if you think they are the people to do it your delusional. We need incentives on buying electric cars, insulating our homes, Grant’s for new more efficient heating systems etc. If the money they are taking from us were ringfenced for this more people would be on board.
Blah Blah Blah,
It. will be the quote of the decade!
Remember, when they open their mouths for the camera – Blah Blah Blah
Climate change is not even the real problem; ecological overshoot is (Rees, 2020). ‘Overshoot’ occurs when humanity consumes bio-resources faster than ecosystems can regenerate and waste production exceeds nature’s assimilative capacity (see GFN, 2021). In effect, the growing human enterprise is literally consuming and polluting the biophysical basis of its own existence.
Overshoot is a meta-problem: climate change; plunging biodiversity; pollution of land, air and waters; tropical deforestation; soil/land degradation etc., etc., are all co-symptoms of overshoot. Climate change is an excess waste problem — CO2 is the greatest waste by weight of modern techno-industrial (MTI) economies. We cannot solve any major symptom of overshoot in isolation. Indeed, the mainstream approach to emissions reductions will not only fail to subdue climate change but, by promoting material growth, will exacerbate overshoot (Seibert and Rees, 2021). On the other hand, if we eliminate overshoot we simultaneously relieve its various symptoms. The problem is, the only way to eliminate overshoot is, by definition, through some combination of absolute reductions in energy and material consumption and smaller populations, i.e., through controlled economic contraction.
This is why we cannot expect COP-26 to address the human eco-predicament.
John Gormley was minister for the environment and the proposal for 2.5% p.a reductions was included in the Climate Change Response Bill 2010.
have your say