It has been estimated that at least 3,500 hydropower dams are planned or are under construction in regions that include some of the most ecologically valuable and fertile parts of the world such as the great basins of the Amazon, Congo and Mekong rivers. There are already many dams on major rivers draining the Himalayas, and hundreds more are planned in Nepal, Bhutan, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Among the thousands of dams in China is the world's biggest one - the Three Gorges dam on the Yangtze River which required 70 million tonnes of concrete and displaced 1.3 million people. Everywhere, large hydropower dams are notoriously disruptive to ecology, downstream agriculture, fisheries and the livelihoods of rural people. Many dams, depending on the extent of submerged forest and other rotting organic matter, will contribute to global warming for years by releasing methane, a greenhouse gas that is many times more potent than CO2.
We are often reminded that cattle also emit methane, and that raising livestock is an inefficient way of using land. Methane emissions can be reduced by changes to cattle diets but nothing can be done about the fact that meat contains only a small percentage of the calories that are consumed by an animal before it is slaughtered. Land can always support more vegetarians than meat-eaters. But if the hope is to restore the earth's natural systems to some extent then supporting more people on the same acreage is not helpful unless it restores or conserves natural systems elsewhere. Overgrazing on arid and marginal lands is a serious problem but trying to grow crops in the wrong places can be even more destructive.
At the heart of the global need, it is hard to see how 'a profound and intentional departure from business as usual' can be consistent with a continued fixation on growing the gross domestic product regardless of environmental cost. Yet, in nearly every country, GDP is put forward by governments as the paramount measure of progress, even though it frequently fails to represent an improvement in the lives of most citizens. In a list of the twenty fastest-growing economies last year, almost all were developing countries in Asia and Africa where people are swelling the towns and cities in search of a better life. Sadly, the coronavirus is likely to put a much bigger dent in CO2 emissions than will be achieved by all the valiant efforts of Greta Thunberg.
Advertisement
Australia produces only 1.3% of the world's CO2 emissions (bushfires excluded) but the per capita output is one of the highest. Better standards are needed if progressive nations are to set examples on the world stage because climate change can only be tackled with global cooperation. This cooperation, it has to be said, must be maintained in a world riven by political and religious rivalries and undermined by corruption. The United Nations estimates that corruption costs $2.6 trillion a year, a sum equal to five percent of global GDP and ten times the amount of official development assistance.
But climate activists should not despair if they are confronted with the true size and global complexity of the problem. Demands for climate action need not fall short of calling for climate resilience to be given a higher priority in activists' countries of residence. To the extent that this results in better town and country planning, hazard preparedness, and protection of natural ecosystems within national borders it will surely be a lot better than no action at all.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
22 posts so far.