Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Climate change: the big picture is being missed

By Melvin Bolton - posted Thursday, 2 April 2020


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.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

22 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Melvin Bolton worked as an ecologist for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. In semi-retirement he is a freelance writer and occasional broadcaster on Radio National. His writing output has included seven books, ranging from fiction through popular science to academic.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Melvin Bolton

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 22 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy