中国与世界,环境危机大家谈

china and the world discuss the environment

  • linkedin group
  • sini weibo
  • facebook
  • twitter
envelope

注册订阅每周免费邮件
Sign up for email updates


文章 Articles

Change, but at what price?

John Vidal

Readinch

After 2008 started with panic over food prices, the world seemed to be waking up to global warming. Then the recession hit. John Vidal reviews a volatile year.

article image
 

No one could have predicted quite how dramatically 2008 would have ended. Even as president George W Bush was slashing his way through United States environmental protection laws, president-elect Barack Obama appointed Nobel prize-winning physicist Steve Chu as the next US energy secretary. Chu is seen as the repudiation of everything that Bush stood for, and predicts that temperatures will rise by a staggering 6.1 Celsius by the end of the century if nothing is done. Although it does not mean the oil age is over, if you want a sign that 2008 was a tipping point, it could not have been clearer.

But go back to the start of the year. Empty shelves in Caracas, riots in India and Mexico, and rice shortages in Dhaka, Manila and Kathmandu. Traders in at least 12 sub-Saharan African countries were hoarding food, and soaring maize and rice prices were leading to political instability. Governments were being forced, one after the other, to step in to protect supplies and control the cost of bread and dairy products.

The problem, said the analysts, was a mix of climate change and extreme weather leading to poor harvests in major grain-growing countries, such as Australia. But the blame also was laid on the many millions of acres of maize, wheat and other crops planted in the United States and elsewhere in 2007 to provide biofuels for cars rather than food for people. Catastrophe loomed, said the United Nations.

It happened slowly and out of sight of the cameras, in the burgeoning cities that are becoming the new frontline of deep poverty. Proof came this month, when the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) reported that 2008 had seen the biggest increase in malnourished people in decades. According to its preliminary data, more than 960 million people -- one in every six people in the world -- now go to bed hungry, and 40 million suffered malnourishment in 2008 because of higher food prices.

This year will go down as the year of interlinked food shortages, climate change and the recession. But it also was the year when it may have dawned on governments that hell-for-leather, western fossil-fuel-based, car-centred growth only ends in social and ecological disaster.

There was soaring air pollution, from a record 622 million passenger vehicles, and near record loss of Amazon and other tropical forests. But climate change dominated the international agenda.

A flood of scientific papers showed Arctic ice melting faster than ever and the melting of the Greenland ice sheet close to becoming irreversible. Methane, one of the most damaging climate-change gases, was found bubbling up from the tundra and the Arctic Ocean. There were record temperatures and near-record hurricane seasons, and scientists and environment groups who believed only a year or two ago that it would be possible to just about hold global temperature to a 2º Celsius rise accepted privately that this could now be impossible.

But it also became clear in 2008 that climate change was disproportionately impacting on the poor. Subsistence farmers around the world reported a pattern of increasingly unpredictable seasons and social problems linked directly to water and higher temperatures.

In north-east Brazil, which has always been drought-prone but which has seen temperatures rise at least 1º Celsius in only 30 years, more than 1.5 million people now cannot access enough water, and must leave home to find work in the biofuel fields in the south of the country each year. In Bangladesh, Uganda, Niger, Malawi, Nepal and elsewhere, people also said that temperatures were becoming hotter and rains less and less predictable.

Another trend became apparent. Rich countries, worried about fast rising global populations and dwindling food and fuel supplies, began buying up farmland in poor countries.

In the United Kingdom, environment secretary Hilary Benn said that Britain’s food supplies, which come increasingly from abroad, were overdependent on oil -- a situation, he said, that “must change”.

But the most extreme admission of oncoming climate and food problems came from Mohamed Nasheed, the new president of the low-lying Maldives, who said he was looking for a new homeland, possibly in India, for the time when his country was swamped by rising seas.

The big, still unanswered question of 2008 was how far the financial, food and ecological crises were linked. The best evidence may come from a 1972 study. A group of economists and ecologists were commissioned to predict the consequences of a rapidly growing world population, rapid industrialisation in developing countries and growing pollution. Their book, Limits to Growth, predicted widespread and growing hunger, oil shortages, and ecological and economic collapse by the mid-21st century if countries did not rethink economic growth.

Actually, for much of this year, it looked as if the rich world had begun to address sustainable development. Europe committed itself to generating 20% of all its energy from renewables by 2020, and banned incandescent light bulbs; Britain became the first country in the world to set itself a legal target of 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050; and more than 70 countries now have national goals for accelerating the use of renewable energy. Businesses, UN agencies, British politicians and many individuals all genuinely tried to reduce emissions.

Led by Britain, pressure mounted for a global trading scheme, and prime minister Gordon Brown’s forest adviser, financier Johan Eliasch, recommended that a multibillion-pound fund be set up to pay the owners of the world’s rainforests not to cut them down. The irony was that a separate study by the Woodland Trust charity found that ancient woodland in Britain was being felled at a rate even faster than the Amazon rainforest.

Clean energy took off in 2008, and climate-change mitigation became an industry, backed by the world's biggest companies. According to HSBC, companies in the climate mitigation business now generate US$300 billion in revenues each year. In November, the International Energy Agency predicted that renewable energy would overtake natural gas to become the second-largest source of power generation worldwide within two years, and that global wind and solar generating capacity would increase by more than 30%.

The energy revolution that had been predicted to start after 2015 appeared to be well under way. Architect Norman Foster designed Masdar, a car-free, solar-powered ecotopia for 40,000 people in the Arabian desert. Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Abu Dhabi’s ruler, was so impressed he ordered two, at US$15 billion each.

In mid-summer, with oil at over US$130 a barrel and government-level talk of oil supplies "peaking", there was concern that the price could top US$200 a barrel. As people rushed to buy smaller cars, fit better boilers and get into wind and solar power, it seemed possible that the constant rise of emissions might genuinely be reversed. Yet by December, the global economy was crashing its gears, and oil had dropped to under US$40 a barrel.

Whether the world weans itself off oil and fossil fuels probably will determine global sustainability over the next 20 years. Low oil prices traditionally push energy efficiency off the policy agenda. Economic recessions have punctured green economic bubbles in the past. When times are tight, the wisdom goes, no one invests in new or risky technologies, and countries stick to cheap and dirty energy.

That was happening in part by the end of 2008. Plummeting demand for recycled materials, especially in China, has drastically lowered prices for old paper, plastic and metals. US and European cities were forced to scale back recycling programmes. Meanwhile, South Africa decided in December that it could not afford “clean” nuclear power stations and plans to increase massively its cheaper but dirtier coal-burning stations. Britain, too, went ahead with plans for more opencast mines.

A more optimistic group of people say the recession may not only check unsustainable growth but also provide breathing space for the world to move to more sensible policies. Governments, said leading greens, have a historic opportunity to "climate proof" their economies in response to economic troubles. Obama and Brown both have said that millions of jobs could be created in green building, wind power, solar thermal and other green technologies.

They were backed by energy gurus such as Amory Lovins, co-director of the Rocky Mountain Institute, and environmental analyst Lester R Brown, who argued that the needs to deal with both climate change and energy security have set renewable energy on a path that cannot be reversed.

The consensus is that 2008 was volatile and dangerously unpredictable. But if governments don’t change, it may come to be seen as a calm before the storm.

www.guardian.co.uk

Copyright Guardian News and Media Limited 2008

Homepage photo by dsearls

评论 comments

5

评论 comments

中文

EN

嗨 Hi Guest user

退出 Logout /


发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文 最大字符 1200

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200

排序 Sort By:

2008,值得深思的一年

粮食危机、大气污染、全球变暖,也许这些字眼对于终日忙于追逐金钱权力的芸芸大众来说早已司空见惯,但是,回首2008这一年,从年初南方的雪灾到“5·12”地震,再到阳宗海水污染事件,这一切值得我们认真反思一下:当代中国需要的是可持续的发展,还是一味追求所谓的GDP增长的数据?

2008:a year for meditation

Such words as "food crisis," "air pollution," "global warming" and so on are too cliche for the crowd that is busy wooing power and fortune. However, many things happened in 2008: the Southern snowstorm earlier this year, the May 12 Wenchuan earthquake and the arsenic polluting of the Yangzong Sea. All this needs our deep thought. What do we really need? A sustainable development or blind pursuit of GDP growth?


奥巴马会不负众望吗?

听了足够多的承诺,我们想看到的是,奥巴马领导下的美国会在气候谈判中扮演好领头羊的角色吗?或者是同布什一样,成为石油巨头的忠实代言人?我想说的是,其实,全世界在拭目以待……

Will Obama live up to people's expectations?

Having heart so much commitment,what we truiy expect is,, under the leadership of Obama, will US play the role of a good leader in the climate negotiations ? Or he will become a faithful spokeman of oil giants,as well as Bush?What I want to say is,actually the whole world is waiting to see~~


转机还是危机?

气候变化vs金融危机,是pk还是双赢?各国政府会选择哪条路,为保住经济发展而不惜放弃对环境的保护,还是两手都要抓两手都要硬,利用环保创造经济机遇?让我们拭目以待。

Opportunity or crisis?

When climate change encounters financial crisis will it be a zero-sum game or a win-win game? Which one will governments choose, to give up environment in order to protect economy, or to have both of them, creating economic opportunities in the process of environmental protection? Let's wait and see.


事态严峻

现在环境恶化已经非常严重了,人类生产生活都受到影响,到了必须行动的时候了。

It is urgent to do something

Environmental degradation is now very terrible. Production and life of human beings are being badly influenced. It's time to do something.


现代文明是否是环境恶化问题所在

现代文明给人类带来了效率;方便;舒适;超越..........数不胜数的好处,可这些众多的好处背后,又给了大自然多少的负面影响.现在很多人们都已经想方设法想改变些什么.我这样说吧:现在我们大家都坐在一架宇宙航行的飞船上,在上飞船之前,大家还在赞扬科学家的伟大,科技的奥妙,可飞机真正上了太空的时候才发现我们用的燃料对太空产生极不好的反映,而且我们产生的生活废品无法处理.必须紧急回航.荒谬的故事就讲到这里.现在的问题是回航之后,我们是不是会因为我们这次航行而放弃再上太空旅行的机会呢?事实上也许还有部分人还埋怨为什么不继续航行 ------ 阿杜

can modern civilization be a cause for deteriorated environment?

modern civilization brings mankind countless benefits such as efficiency, conveniency, coziness, transcendency... but behind all these, how negative is it to the mother nature. now many people have tried every thing to change something. Let me put it this way: presuming we are on a spaceship traveling now and before the traveling, all of us praised the greatness of scientists and the profoundity of technologies. however, it is only after we were in space that we found that the fuel for the travelling was not good to the space and the waste we left had no way to be treated during the space travelling. so the only way is to go back at once. let's stop the absurd story here. and now the question is, will we forget about another try of space travelling after the return? some might actually complain about the cancelling of this travelling----A Du

translated by Ming Li


合作伙伴 Partners

项目 Projects