Global Warming After Kyoto
Although the Kyoto Protocol of December 1997 (see p. 20 of our Winter 1998 issue) made no pretenses of solving the problem of global warming from increased emissions of greenhouse gases, it at least placed a wake-up call to the world to announce an important problem to be solved. It was thus appropriate that one of the plenary speakers at the Fourteenth National STS Meeting (STS-14) in Baltimore, Michael McCabe of Region III of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, should address "Global Climate Change."
According to McCabe, increased emissions of greenhouse gases have increased Earth's temperature by 1oF in the past century, causing the last decade to be the warmest of the present millennium, with the promise of a further global temperature increase of 2oF to 6.5oF in the next century, a faster rate of temperature change than any time in the last 10,000 years. Among the consequences he cited from this global warming are increased deaths from heat (247 per year expected from a 2oF increase in Atlanta), increased ozone concentration (5% from a 4oF increase), increased respiratory diseases, rise in sea level (one foot along the U.S. coast by 2050), salinization of soils, loss of aquatic life, loss of wetlands, alterations of life cycles and habitat, changes in crop yields, more violent rain patterns, and reduced biodiversity.
He added that the pollutants produced by fossil fuel combustion lead to not only global warming but also other problems like acid deposition. Other pollution problems associated with energy are associated with fuel extraction and transport and the inefficiency of power plants.
In 1988 the United Nations began work on global warming by establishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which led to the recent Kyoto conference. Because developing countries blamed developed countries for pollution already released and felt that emissions controls threatened their economic development, the Kyoto Protocol placed no restrictions on developing countries. This in turn prompted U.S. companies to threaten moving plants to developing countries and led the U.S. Senate to pass a resolution requiring that implementation of the Kyoto Protocol 1) could allow no loss of U.S. employment and 2) would have to require the participation of developing countries.
McCabe also listed three mechanisms passed as part of the Kyoto Protocol:
1) emissions trading;
2) joint implementations, which allow developed countries to invest in emission reductions in other developed countries;
3) clean development mechanisms, which allow developed countries to invest in emission reductions in developing countries.
Meanwhile, greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, and McCabe is concerned that a 7% reduction below 1990 levels will be a 35-40% reduction below 2010 levels.
At the same time, though the American coal industry is the largest center of opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, and gasoline cheaper than "designer" water is allowing Americans to feel "entitled" to buy a V-10 Leviathan, McCabe is heartened by progress made by several industrial firms. Several companies, such as British Petroleum, have developed new technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emission and recognize the benefits and profits these technologies will reap in the long run (a point also made by Amory Lovins in the Jan/Feb 99 issue of World.Watch). Dupont is expected to meet its goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2010, and McCabe would like to see them educate Congress, which by only a slim majority is authorized to use federal funds to address the global warming issue.
The "Ethical Criteria for Realistic and Equitable Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policy" were subsequently addressed at STS-14 by Constantine Hadjilambrinos of Florida International University (Miami). Only with proper ethics can developing countries be enlisted to participate in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, he pointed out. But, he asked, is there a technological fix, as there was in reducing CFC [ChloroFluoroCarbons, shown to deplete stratospheric ozone] emissions? Chlorofluorocarbons are a smaller part of our economy, Hadjilmabrinos noted, and Dupont, whose patents on them were about to expire, also held the patents to their replacements. But carbon dioxide emissions have major economic impact, and implementing replacement technologies requires significant structural shifts, which must be made by politicians, whose terms of office are shorter than the time frame for implementing these changes. Hadjilambrinos felt that ethics can tie these two aspects together and move them along. "It's the right thing to do," he added. One aspect of this is our obligation to future generations, while the other is the distribution of resources among the world. Hadjilambrinos felt that we need to reach a just solution that is also feasible.
To lay the groundwork for such a "just and feasible solution" Hadjilambrinos portrayed the world as follows: industrialized countries emit more than their share of greenhouse gases and are responsible for global climate change, while developing nations are located in areas most sensitive to global climate change and are the least able to cope with it. Paying developing nations for using their share of the biosphere would wipe out their debt in twelve weeks, he said. He listed the following criteria for dealing with greenhouse gas reduction: egalitarianism (entitlement proportional to population), sovereignty (the Kyoto Protocol), horizontal equity (entitlement proportional to gross domestic product), vertical equity (entitlement inversely proportional to gross domestic product), market justice (highest bidder), compensation (no suffering or welfare loss), and consensus. He argued that vertical equity is the most just and that it could be achieved by tying developing countries to developed countries.
Home Spring 99 Full Screen
The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION