Copenhagen is a Crock. Don’t Believe the Hype

If you listened to the rhetoric that came out of the mouths of many politicians, NGO’s and even some business leaders in the lead up to the climate change discussions currently being held in Copenhagen, you would be forgiven for thinking that the world is doomed if the politicians don’t get it right this month.

Well folks, if they are right, we might as well put our heads in the sand, say our final prayers and kiss our sorry world goodbye – because they won’t achieve much of anything in Copenhagen. On the current trajectory, it’s not possible for politicians to make any significant changes.

There are four significant reasons for this:

1) The nations of the world just don’t get along. Trying to get the nations of the world to actually agree and work together on anything is a lesson in futility. Sure, we might be able to get majority agreement on some things, but it’s usually only in principle and hardly ever truly followed through on.

This is because we are all fundamentally selfish. The nature of politics means that every nation is pursuing its own interests. Every nation will do whatever it needs to in order to protect its own well-being.

Something like protecting the global environment for future generations involves making sacrifices now that have no immediate pay-off and reaching out to truly help others with no self interest beyond simply creating a better world. That’s not close enough to the “now” for it to matter to politicians who are working within limited time frames till they come up for election again. The political world doesn’t work on real delayed gratification unless they can spin it well for their constituents.

2) Carbon credit trading is the wrong answer. Carbon credit trading, which was the answer that came out of Kyoto and is once again the focal point in Copenhagen, has proven to have little effect on the well-being of the environment, instead it has simply helped make a bunch of companies and people wealthier.

The Kyoto protocol was agreed on in 1997. Twelve years later the carbon trading market is worth $100 billion. To top it all off, companies like Enron, which were well placed to profit from trading in carbon credits, celebrated the protocol as being full of immediate business opportunities and openly stated that they would have been happy for the US to become a part of it. That should set off alarm bells for any discussion around environmental justice. When some of the biggest polluters are in agreement with a possible solution, it’s no solution at all.

The famed carbon crusader himself, Al Gore, who was the main US negotiator around the Kyoto protocol in the 90′s was the biggest spokesperson for making the protocol friendly for large US businesses who were/are big emitters. It was Al Gore who argued for a system that allowed big emitters to go on pumping out as much pollution as they liked as long as they purchased credits from low emitters. It was touted as a mechanism that would force the market to regulate itself – it has not worked. Al Gore is no environmental angel. All this business continues to increase his wealth.

With businesses and lobbyists being given unfettered access to delegates in Copenhagen while concerned NGO’s are censored and masses of demonstrators are kept at bay by riot police, you can bet that it will only be more of the same.

3) Money is already being spent in the wrong places. With trillions of dollars being spent without question on conflict/war, financial bail-outs for failed businesses, and large economies like the EU and US spending billions on subsidizing industries (predominantly agricultural) that have no real markets available for the amount they are producing, everyone will use lack of finances as an excuse to not put serious money into solving environmental issues.

4) We’re still working from a flawed economic model that drives everything – perpetual growth. As long as growth is the central aim of all nations and they are working to protect growth, nothing can change. Too many nations are living beyond their means, consuming at an unsustainable rate and still trying to drive growth.

Growth, when driven by finite resources must have a cost. At the moment that cost is the well-being of low income nations and the environment. Until a nation is willing to look at a different model of living that does not involve growth, it will not sacrifice of itself for the well-being of another.

If the price of growth is riding the backs of low-income nations and continuing to bleed the environment dry, then we can expect to see much of the same after Copenhagen. The best Copenhagen can give us is a placebo – a loose agreement that does not bind anyone to anything. That placebo, whatever it may be, will be touted as an amazing answer to the stated problem and will allow the wealthy to appease their consciences and walk a moral high-ground.

If nothing comes out of it, expect the high-income nations to point to the low income nations as the culprits for no movement forward.

Alarmists everywhere need to stop pointing to Copenhagen as the focal point of this environmental issue.

Alarmists on the side of seeing man-made climate change as a very real issue need to stop placing their hopes in politicians and realize that any real change has always been driven by the people. It will be driven by people making a stand. It will be driven by people changing their lifestyles and it will be driven by people innovating towards change.

Alarmists who view climate change sceptically and have involved themselves in scaremongering around Copenhagen and what it will lead to, need to realize that when people like Lord Monckton, who has had a lot of press, say they’ve read a report and then step into the realm of overstated alarmism by claiming it will lead to some sort of communist one world government that destroys the sovereignty of every nation and steals the hard earned money of all citizens, then it’s just a matter of someone tickling the ears of the skeptics. It’s not just the environmentalists who are given to alarmism.

When people like Lord Monckton open their mouths, it’s worth checking the facts, just as it’s worth checking the facts when environmental extremists make wild claims. Half/part truths from both sides are dangerous. The report Lord Monckton was referring to calls for a governing body that does not carry the power of a one world government and it was one possible solution amongst many that could come out of Copenhagen.

People who point to Copenhagen in fear that it will produce a one world government are placing a lot of unfounded faith in the ability of the negotiators if they think they can come up with an answer that potent. It’s a faith that I do not share.

When it comes to believing in the ability of the negotiators in Copenhagen to come out with anything that could be considered a credible answer, I would consider myself an extreme skeptic, but I do not believe that Copenhagen is the last hope for humanity and the world – that’s just silly talk. Alarmism from all sides needs to be held in balance.