Wealthy countries may have the adequate resources to adapt to climate change. Poorer countries do not (low adaptive capacity). Ways to increase adapt capacity:
- Reducing poverty to meet costs of adaptation
- Increasing access to resources including energy and materials
- Improving health care – malnutrition, malaria and HIV/AIDS
- Improving infrastructure such as roads, energy supply and communication
- Improving education and skills to develop understanding.
The ability to adapt is linked to the level of development of a country or area.
Adaptation is usually only locally linked, however mitigation can be local or globally.
Local agencies (local councils) decide on actions needed. E.g. the UK government target is for 30% of domestic waste to be recycled by 2010. This is one way to reduce waste to meet the Kyoto Protocol target. The government funds advertising but local councils provide recycling bins, boxes and skips.
Key Players in Climate Change
Businesses:
Businesses argued that reducing pollution would cost money, profits and jobs. TNCs such as Exxon, Shell, BP and Ford all funded the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) between 1989 and 2002. This opposed the action on climate change and funded research to counter the warnings about global warming. However companies began to leave to group and now all of these companies find themselves trying to find ways of becoming ‘greener’. This is because of factors such as:
- Moral and public pressure to protect and not destroy the environment
- Fears about energy supply
- Increased moves by governments towards taxing carbon emissions
- Demands from investors, such as pensions funds, for companies to become environment sound
- Renewable energy, hybrid cars and energy efficient appliance, which represent new markets
The stern review concluded that it was more sensible to invest in mitigation today than ‘do nothing’ and face the costs of at least 5% and possibly 20% if global annual GDP.
Climate change might bring some benefits, such as few deaths from hypothermia, new crops for some areas, increase tourisms for other areas. However stern argues these benefits will be tiny compared to the eventual costs. Mitigation will involve research and development and will provide new jobs and opportunities for economic growth.
Taxing and trading:
Many countries use their tax system to raise the costs of polluting. In the UK, car tax is priced by carbon emissions.
- Tax band B e.g. Vauxhall Corsa 1.0 litre = £35
- Tax band D e.g. ford focus 1.6 litre = £145
- Tax band G e.g. BMW 550 4.8 litre = £400
Choosing to drive a larger car costs more, as it pollutes more. Air travel is likely to be taxed in the future, or Carbon ‘credit cards’ introduced which would give each person a ‘carbon budget’ which would be debited as resources were bought (flights, petrol, food, household energy). Any carbon use above the set amount would be charges – carbon taxing. (Could take a long time to implement)
Local Action:
Calls on governments to encourage local authorities to implement sustainable stratagies to improve the environment, and reduce carbon emissions. An example of this is London’s ‘Action Today to Protect Tomorrow’ plan, which commits the city to reduce its CO2 emissions to 30% of 1990 levels by 2025.
Personal changes:
Personal carbon footprints can be reduced by:
- Walking, cycling or taking the bus instead of using the car
- Buying locally produced food
- Switching your energy supplier to one using renewable sources
- Energy efficiency in the home, such as using energy efficient light bulbs.
Switching every light bulb in London to energy efficient ones would save 575,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions every year.
However issues with it are, that asking everyone to reduce their emissions, while some people may have already low carbon footprint than the average. Millions of people in the developing world do not consume enough to have even a reasonable quality of life – would they need to consume more rather than fewer? This has led to the contraction and convergence model – allows poorer countries to increase their emissions, while developed countries reduce theirs.
Advantages of this model include:
- Allowing countries such as china and india to continue to develop and perhaps overcome their objections to limiting their own emissions
- Implies that resources need to be shared out more fairly.
- Recognises that over-consuming nations need to reduce their footprints.
