This
week I read Naomi Klein’s article “Climate Rage” and found it incredibly
interesting. This article mainly
discusses climate debt. Climate debt is
the idea that developed countries should pay the developing countries money for
the damage that has been done to them due to climate change. Justin Lin of the World Bank estimated that
even though developing nations only contribute about a third of the total
greenhouse gas emissions leading to climate change, about eighty percent of
climate change-related damage will fall on their shoulders. In addition, climate debt is the money that
developing countries would like from the developed countries so that they can
develop sustainably. Not using fossil
fuels to save the environment would impede developing nations’ economic growth,
which is unfair because the developed nations got to use them during their
development.
The climate debt idea is obviously
an area of debate. People used to think
that everyone should work together on fixing climate change, but the climate
debt idea puts most of the blame and responsibility on the developed
nations. Obviously, many developed
nations do not want to just give money to another country, especially in the range
of billions of dollars. America, which
has not really stepped up to help internationally or domestically and does not
appreciate the scientific consensus of climate change in Congress, will
probably be completely against it. The
European Union, as discussed in the article, probably will be a little more
compromising.
I think that the idea of climate
debt has two parts, one of which should be compensated for. The first part of climate debt is the
developed nations paying for the climate change damage done to the developing
countries. Sharon Looremeta, a
spokesperson of some Kenyan tribes, claims that the drought in Africa is
killing off the cattle and that these tribes should get reparations. Since the world knows who pollutes what
amount, the highest polluters should help to pay the most. I disagree with this argument. As discussed in the science section of the book,
no specific event can be linked to climate change. As a result of this, no specific event should
really have to be payed for by the developed nations. Every environmental event could be pushed on
the developed countries if this were to happen, so this is not a fair way of
handling the situation.
On the other hand, developed nations
paying to help developing nations grow in a sustainable fashion does seem to
make sense. Developed nations used the
cheap, high energy density fossil fuels to become developed. It is only fair that the currently developing
nations get to use that same advantage in their own development, especially if
we are still using those fuel sources!
As a result, the developed nations paying to help places develop
sustainably make sense, both internationally with the developing nations and
domestically in our own country. The
question is, will anybody do it?
The European Union surprised me and
said that they would consider giving $22 billion a year to pay their climate
debt. This isn’t even close to the
estimated hundreds of billions that would be needed to help the developing
nations develop sustainably and deal with climate change, but it is a
start. Regardless, climate debt is a
highly debated idea that the developed nations will not necessarily like. The developing countries pushing for this aid
could lead to the countries getting some aid, which would help the climate
change fight. On the contrary, it could
lead to developed countries getting frustrated and not helping fight climate
change globally at all, which could happen with the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment