Category Archives: climate change

Migration, Conflicts and Climate Change: What the Pope Said and How the US reacted

On Monday morning 16 October, I rushed to FAO, the opening ceremony for World Food Day was to be graced by Pope Francis who had agreed to deliver the keynote address: the theme was migration…Here is the article I immediately wrote for Impakter (it was published yesterday):

MIGRATION, CONFLICTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE: A NEW TURN?

World Food Day held yesterday at UN-FAO headquarters in Rome was full of surprises. An event organized since 1979 by FAO every year on October 16 to celebrate the founding of the organization in 1945, World Food Day is the occasion to draw the international community’s attention to a pressing issue in agriculture and rural development. This rarely excites the world’s attention, but this year’s theme was particularly well chosen: The focus was on what is undoubtedly the number one problem of our times, migration.

IN THE PHOTO: HIS HOLINESS POPE FRANCIS GREETING FAO STAFF DURING THE WORLD FOOD DAY CEREMONY, FAO HEADQUARTERS (ATRIUM).PHOTO CREDIT: ©FAO/CRISTIANO MINICHIELLO.

The numbers are staggering: UN figures show there are roughly 244 million international migrants – that’s more than the whole population of Brazil –  while 763 million are migrants within their own country. Taking the two numbers together, that’s about one billion people, as much as India.

As the video FAO made for the occasion shows, the problem with migration is the lack of choice. And the solution to the migration crisis, is investment in the rural sector to give people a livelihood, so that they are not forced to migrate. Why the rural sector? Because that is where the problem starts, 75% of the world’s poor and food insecure live in rural areas.

In 2015 alone, 65.3 million people were forcibly displaced by conflict worldwide, and more than 19 million people were internally displaced because of natural disasters – many triggered by climate change.

First, Pope Francis is different from other Popes in that he attends more readily UN events. He has come before to FAO and gave a notable address to the ICN2.  Food security is clearly one of his major concerns.

To read the rest on Impakter, click here. You will also find there the video of the Pope’s speech (very interesting, worth seeing, it’s only 20 minutes) and I report on the remarkable position taken by the US Secretary of Agriculture: Since the Trump administration announced last week that the US was pulling out of UNESCO, everybody in Rome feared the worst. But the worst, surprisingly given Trump’s track record, didn’t happen. See what happened and rejoice!

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under climate change, politics, United Nations

G20: American Isolationism is Back

My latest article on Impakter, all about the G20 – I do  believe it marks a turning point for American world leadership. Here is the beginning (and Trump does look grumpy!):

The G20 meeting that just finished in Hamburg on 8 July confirmed the United States’ embrace of isolationism. Presided over by Angela Merkel, Germany’s Chancellor, Trump de facto stole the show. Both she and Emmanuel Macron, the new President of France, tried very hard to woo Trump back in the concert of nations. Macron even held a last-minute meeting with UK’s Theresa May and Australia’s Malcolm Turnbull on the climate change issue to try and change Trump’s mind.

To no avail.

THE US IS ALONE ON CLIMATE

The final communiqué is clear, the G20 is split.

Nineteen countries declare the Paris Climate Accord as “irreversible”, one does not, the United States. The country that was once the world’s leader – ever since World War II – emphatically goes its own way, with a whole paragraph in the G20 Declaration dedicated to that fateful choice:

“We take note of the decision of the United States of America to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. The United States of America announced it will immediately cease the implementation of its current nationally-determined contribution and affirms its strong commitment to an approach that lowers emissions while supporting economic growth and improving energy security needs. The United States of America states it will endeavor to work closely with other countries to help them access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently and help deploy renewable and other clean energy sources, given the importance of energy access and security in their nationally determined contributions.”

This is a historic break. The US is parting company with the whole of the international community that counts. The G20 meeting brings together the most important world leaders and international organizations, from the UN to the World Bank and the IMF, once a year, ever since the 2008 financial meltdown (before then, it was a meeting of financial ministers and central bank governors).

This formulation in the final communiqué, “we take note of the decision of the United States” is suavely diplomatic and non-judgmental.  And in allowing the US to state its position, that it would “work closely with other countries to help access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently”, there is an implicit recognition by the G20 that there is such a thing as using fossil fuels “more cleanly and efficiently”.  This amounts to a recognition not only of where the US stands, but it acknowledges a policy point dear to Trump.

Environmental activists predictably are up in arms, it marks a clear retreat from the fight against climate change. Macron indicated he wouldn’t give up, he’d continue to press Trump on climate and planned a follow-up meeting in Paris in December to sustain the Paris Climate Accord momentum. The G20 did however do something positive: It reiterate its financial support to countries that needed help in the transition to clean energy:

To read the rest on Impakter, click here. Do let me know what you think!

Comments Off on G20: American Isolationism is Back

Filed under climate change, politics

The Real Impact of US Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord

I am happy to reblog this Editorial Board piece of Impakter Magazine, I wholly subscribe to what is said here and it really needs to be said.

THE REAL IMPACT OF US WITHDRAWAL FROM THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD

by MICHELE BONANNO on June 10, 2017

IMPAKTER EDITORIAL BOARD

 

President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement is likely to have two major consequences. The first is environmental, the other political.

Starting with environmental impact. It will be bad for the planet, but it will be bad primarily for the United States.

Above all, it means that the Federal Government will play no supporting role in the move to a non-fossil fueled economy, in total contrast to what governments of all other countries plan to do and are already doing. This leaves the United States at a clear disadvantage in the concert of nations. And it is already happening, to see this go no further than India, the world’s third largest polluter after China and the US: Prime Minister Modi has made abandoning coal-fueled electricity an official policy. India is embracing green energy because it is both cheaper and cleaner.

Can the American private sector fill in the void left by the Federal Government? Probably. The momentum is there, California is committed to a carbon-neutral future and California is a big player among American States with its 80 million people. Moreover, many States are following its example.

Equally important: Hundreds of American corporations have pledged to reduce their carbon footprint and have done so most recently in an open letter on the Wall Street Journal. Perhaps not all signatories are serious about fighting global warming, some have been caught funding anti-climate lobbies. But eventually their “green washing” is likely to turn into the real thing, as consumers and public opinion hold them to their pledge.

Yet, because the American economy will be lacking any Federal stimulus as environmental protection policies are eliminated, it is likely that job creation will be slowed down in what are today the more technologically advanced sectors of the economy. The new green energy sector won’t get the subsidies and tax breaks it needs in contrast to what will happen in other countries. Meanwhile, deregulation of American fossil-fuel industries that already enjoy tax breaks and subsidies will sustain their expansion.

This brings up an issue that has not been sufficiently raised in the media: The public health cost of an expansion in fossil-fueled industries, a cost that President Trump has not factored in. He has talked in terms of defending American jobs in the fossil fuel sector, he has never mentioned the loss of American lives and productivity, as people get sick.

A surge in coal production and fracking will clearly threaten the quality of water and air, this is not a matter for conjecture. The data is in, we can calculate the impact of diseases related to air and water pollution, and tally up the early deaths and cost to the Gross National Product in terms of increased cost care and work hours lost, and worse, the number of deaths. The numbers are staggering. For example, a recent scientific report on air pollution caused by energy production in the U.S. over a decade (2002-2011) concluded that, while there was an improvement as fossil fuel-industries were cut back, the damage still amounted to at least $131 billion in the year 2011 alone, thus confirming the success of more stringent emissions regulations on the energy sector while also pointing out the need to continue cracking down. A need that went unheeded by the Trump Administration.

To read the rest on Impakter, click here.

Comments Off on The Real Impact of US Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord

Filed under climate change, Economics, politics

How to Stop Climate Change and Reverse Global Warming

My latest article on Impakter, hope you enjoy it. I tackle here what I consider the key issue of our time and these are great books, a must read, the authors make a truly convincing case: Thanks to people like them and their work, we should not despair, all is not lost in the fight against climate change….

BOOK REVIEWS:  CLIMATE OF HOPE: HOW CITIES, BUSINESSES, AND CITIZENS CAN SAVE THE PLANET BY MICHAEL BLOOMBERG  (AUTHOR), CARL POPE  (AUTHOR) PUBLISHED BY ST MARTIN’S PRESS (APRIL 2017) 272 PAGES;

DRAWDOWN: THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVER PROPOSED TO REVERSE GLOBAL WARMING BY PAUL HAWKEN  (AUTHOR, EDITOR), TOM STEYER (FOREWORD) PENGUIN BOOKS (APRIL 2017) 240 PAGES; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PROJECT DRAWDOWN’S WEBSITE

Two books published this year on the same day (April 18) and on the same subject, climate change. Two books that could change our lives, our children’s lives and how we view the challenge of climate change.

Two books that make reversing global warming look like it’s within reach. At last.

So far, we’ve heard too much doom and gloom. And we still do, as attested by a recent Op-Ed from environmental activist Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org.  Published on the New York Times last month, it has a scary title: The Planet Can’t Stand This Presidency, with a subtitle that doubles down on the message: “Trump is in charge at a critical moment for keeping climate change in check. We may never recover.” And the opening sentence is a scary reminder that coal pollution kills.

But it’s time to try a different approach. Let’s be positive: Global warming can be arrested, and better still, we may be able to reverse it. It will require a lot of effort and goodwill, but it can be done. And it won’t be costly, on the contrary, it will jump start a new age of prosperity and well being.

Both books tell us how to do it and their starting point is the same: The evidence is in, it really can be done. Thanks to them, we can start to entertain a rosy vision of our future, and that’s amazing. Furthermore, the two books are complementary and re-enforce each other, even though they are radically different in structure and the stories they tell.

A Hopeful Message on the Climate, from Michael Bloomberg and Carl Pope

The way forward suggested in Climate of Hope, co-written by  Michael Bloomberg and Carl Pope, may surprise a lot of people. It certainly surprised me, I hadn’t realized the extent to which cities play a major role in the climate change drama.

The other surprise is to see two completely different persons working as co-authors, an endeavor that requires deep understanding and mutual respect. Bloomberg is a billionaire, Carl Pope an environmentalist.

To read the rest and find out about Paul Hawken’s work and the role of Patricia Scotland, click here.

Comments Off on How to Stop Climate Change and Reverse Global Warming

Filed under Book review, climate change, non-fiction, politics