Climate for Change

As we hear again today that police and protestors have clashed at the Copenhagen Summit, it is clear that global warming still arouses passions – although a protestor being subdued with a baton is unlikely to influence the debate taking place between delegates of the 192 nations represented at the summit.
The good news, of course, is that there at least seems to be some acceptance of the global warming issue and its impact on the sustainability of the earth and those of us reliant on it being around and habitable for some time to come.  Regardless of whether you believe the issue is a consequence man’s industrialization or simply a normal pattern in the earth’s climate change trends, the warming of the globe is having a significant impact.  Furthermore, whilst there is little that can be done to halt the damage already being felt, the desire to slow down future temperature increases and to provide support for areas already damaged seems to be a sensible strategy and a good use of world leader’s time.
At Zeitgeist we view the politics around the summit of particular interest too.  The Danish coming to terms with their inter government department struggles, Friends of the Earth turning up only to find their passes invalid, China displaying real resentment and the African nations looking for technology transfer to be speeded up.  The sub plots are intriguing.
However, ultimately it comes down to the economics – the costs and competitiveness of countries in the global economy.  Whilst the EU, Japan, New Zealand and Australia have all declared what they are prepared to deliver by 2020 there is much to be discussed before any form of legally binding treaty can be reached.  Developing nations blame the developed nations for causing the problem in the first place and are therefore expecting them to pay for it.
Even here though,  amongst those countries apparently committed to the climate change cause, the sub-plots are complex and acceptance of the causes of global warming are not universal.  In Australia, for example, Malcolm Turnbull  recently lost his job as the head of the oppositional Liberal party, for supporting the government’s revised Emissions Trading Scheme.  Many within his party absolutely reject the scientific case for man contributing to global warming and, as he lost their support (amid mass resignations), he lost his chance of ever becoming Australia’s Prime Minister.  Few regard Tony ‘The Mad Monk’ Abbott as a credible replacement – but he does passionately subscribe to the climate change sceptics’ view.
So, what price to ‘save the earth’?  Well, developed countries are looking at 100’s of billions of dollars each year to mitigate some of the current problems and the World Bank prepared a study which suggests that a further $100bn per year is required on top of the $100bn already provided by the richer nations in overseas aid to poorer, developing nations.  The solution is not cheap.
Like any strategy it comes down to trade-offs and the bottom line.  What do we need to do to succeed and what are we prepared to live with, sacrifice or change?  These are questions any business asks itself, or should ask itself, on a frequent and regular basis.  The difference of course is that the stakes being discussed in Copenhagen are significantly higher and affect us all…