Politics of climate change
Became very soon an important topic for the political agenda, from 80s
1997 un members meet at Kyoto to cut the greenhouse gas emissions
But it puts no constraints on developing countries, there were very little practical powers
And not all the countries shared the same need for actions
The cost of green politics is on the most polluted countries but usually these countries want to avoid
eccessive costs.
People who will suffer deeply from the climate change are people who don’t exist yet or cannot vote, so
the future generation. But this problem became so crucial that also the present generation will be in danger
for it
America relies heavily on fossil fuels so decided not to sign the Kyoto protocol
80% of the energy of the planet comes from the ground, from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels were formed of
remains of organisms which lived and died millions of years ago they hold a lot of carbon within them
making them a very concentrated form of energy. It caused global warming, greenhouse emissions and so
on.
China: in 1997 was considered a developing country and so was exempted for Kyoto protocols and the cut
of emissions and it tooks full advantage of it. But its gas emissions increased and it become the largest
greenhouse gas emitter on the planet
At the copenaghen summit the Chinese envoy said that developed countries should not impose restrictions
on developing countries, so for two decades china refused to act
In 2010 all that changed: with xinginping: the reason? Because it has a lot to lose from climate change. In
that period renewable energy become very popular, so they were able to produce some power and china
understand it and they wanted to avoid any renewable revolution (?)(?)
Paris agreement required all countries both developed and developing to commit to tackling global
warming, setting a specific target: the increase in average global temperature should be kept well below 2
degrees with efforts to keep it down to 1.5 degrees, over preindustrial level and in order to comply with
this objective there is a maximum of CO2 we can emit (carbon budget)
But it involved some compromise: it was achieved by telling all the countries try just to do the best you can,
giving up to the idea of a legally binding way to tackle the problem
The cut of emissions were too small to meet the 2-degree target. The actions were insufficient. And the
political compromises make it difficult to take concrete actions to tackle the problem
CO2 emissions have doubled and every decade since then has been warmer that the one before.
But from 2019 a new generation of environmental activists are taking to the streets determined to ensure
that èpolitics take the adequate action to save the planet
Radical realism for climate justice: there ia a gap between how much fossil fuel we can burn and how much
fossil fuel countries and companies are planning to extract. This situation will exceed the carbon budget.
We need a managed decline of fossil fuel production:
