Montreal Protocol Approach To Climate Crisis

2013-04-25T10:56:14Z

The Montreal Protocol demonstrated that nations can come together to successfully design and implement effective environmental legislation. The general public did not originally accept the idea of a hole in the ozone layer – yet over time, it gradually became viewed as scientific fact, and action was taken. However a segments of the corporate elite are purposely confusing climate science due to the amount of investment in fossil fuels.

The key issue with the Montreal Protocol is that, unlike greenhouse gases (GHGs), the phasing out of harmful CFC gases did not require enormous investment or infrastructural changes.

CFCs were only used to manufacture aerosol sprays, foams and packing materials, solvents, and refrigerants. Research and patents by major corporations into cheaper and alternative substances were already well under way during the 1980’s.[1]

The limitation of a Montreal Protocol approach to GHGs is that there is no ‘political will’ to do it. Despite their action toward CFC, the Montreal Protocol lacked the political will to approach GHCs. Yet, public awareness of global warming has increased and people are more willing to use renewable sources of energy, eco-friendly products/technology and energy saving approaches. If the majority of interested stakeholders – including engaged citizens, organizations, and relevant NGOs - unified and demanded that corporations and governments commit themselves to the Montreal Protocol in the ICCR and subsequently phase out the production, utilization, consumption and disposal of GHGs, then we could succeed in reversing international trends.

Some corporations, and governments have already taken the lead. In Scandinavian countries there are now symbols such evergreen, falcon, and swans appearing on more packages – a marketing pre-requisite for a certain sector of the market. The markers signify certain standards of recycling, and efficient use of energy and materials by preventing delayed emissions. Following such a consumer atmosphere, it would be a marketing folly for the fossil fuel industries to continue to resist change. Fossil fuels are a finite resource expected to run out within the next fifty years. In fact, they need to diversify if they are going to survive the climate crisis.

“Business people must either dedicate themselves to transforming commerce to a restorative undertaking or march society to the undertaker.”[2] Yet once climate change becomes more noticeable, the scientific argument will be become more dominant within the mainstream consciousness. When this takes place the ICCR will change its limited ideas of emission reductions to a full phasing out of all GHGs substances. Those governments and corporations that adapt to the changing social environment will survive and prosper. Those that remain stuck in the old ways will become redundant.

Therefore what can be said for the future of our civilization if we do not act now?

[1]Richard G. Gann and Paul A. Reneke, Editors. ‘Proceedings of HOTWC-2002 12th Halon Options Technical Working Conference, Albuquerque,’ NM.’NIST Special Publication 984 (April 20 – May 2, 2002).

[2] Paul Hawken, The Ecology of Commerce (New York: Harper Collins, 1993) p2.

Opinions voiced by Global Minds do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Global Journal.

Towards a New Paradigm

2013-01-16T13:00:45Z

When Galileo Galilei claimed that the earth revolved around the sun instead of celestial subjects revolving around the earth it broke away from conventional knowledge. This eventually led to a new level of understanding and cooperation. Human centric laws encourage people to ‘believe’ the myth that we are separate from our environment and thus ‘conquering’ technology continues to develop; which attempts to create a civilisation independent from nature.

If Global Governance was encouraged then people would regard themselves as part of the globe and recognise their dependence on the ecosystem and therefore more collaborative types of eco-technology would develop.

We need international laws that develop earth centered strategies in order to develop eco-technology as a means of social - economic responsibility and international security.

It is apparent that a growing human population and self-centred world economy have increased the pressure on our ecosystem. The agricultural land, climate, forests, coastal areas, lakes and oceans have all shown signs of excessive strain and ill-treatment. Some have argued that humanity is far away from environmental constraints but evidence overwhelmingly shows that the environmental capacity to support us is already being exceeded. The simple truth is that a far ‘greater’ level of international cooperation is needed if humanity is going to survive this crisis. The problem lies in each country’s pursuit of its own interest’s to gain comparative advantage over other states.

This is achieved by a total commitment to economic growth based on the production, utilisation and consumption of natural resources. In that it is argued that by destroying the rain forest within a territory it would lead to a ‘comparative advantage’ by raising exports and therefore gaining short term economic growth. However this would lead to long term unsustainable economic growth since the rain forest essentially keeps the ecosystem in balance and thus the ecosystem is the foundation of economic growth.

The Industrial Revolution defined the competitive nature of the nation state and sovereignty creating classical liberalism.[1] However at the same time it changed the relationship between humanity and nature (developed during the Enlightenment philosophy from Hegel, Descartes and John Stuart Mill) where human activities were seen as separate from nature. While the perceived idea of separation between humanity and nature led to advancements in certain areas, such as global ‘human’ communications and the expansion of urban infrastructure; in the long term however, this unconscious delusion hasn't allowed the basic ecological conditions of life to continue to thrive on earth because it is enclosed within national interests.

As the Environmental Lawyer Cormac Cullinan stated:

“Our species has a major governance crisis, and far-reaching changes in how we regulate human behaviour are essential for the sake of the Earth and all its inhabitants. A good starting point would be to recognise that our governance systems are still based on the philosophies of Descartes, Bacon and Newton. They saw the universe as a complex machine that we could understand by dissecting and analysing its component parts. Allied to this was the conviction that humans are the rightful owners and masters of this universe of objects, with a right to use it for the exclusive benefit of the human species. This world-view created a barrier between humans and ‘nature’. It also led us into the dangerous delusion that we can disengage ourselves from the fate of the planet and live happily in a human world in which technology can provide all we desire, instead of the Earth providing all we need.” [2]

The industrialized countries developed their economies over the past 150 years in part by treating the atmosphere and natural resources as free and unlimited and therefore unconsciously generating the great quantities of GHGs. We have since become conscious of this process and have become more aware of our interconnectedness with nature through quantum physics, ecology, global communication, and holistic understanding.

Therefore we need to act more intelligently and responsibly and need to transcend the dysfunctional and out dated modes of production that are now endangering the planet.

As the Philosopher Thomas Berry stated:

“Our ethical traditions know how to deal with suicide, homicide and even genocide; but these traditions collapse entirely when confronted with biocide, the extinction of the vulnerable life systems of the Earth, and geocide, the devastation of the Earth itself.” [3]

[1] For example see: Adam Smith ‘The Wealth of Nations’ (1776)

[2] Cormac Cullinan ‘Justice for All’ Article published in Resurgence Magazine No.216. (Sept/Oct 2002)

[3] Thomas Berry ‘The Great Work: Our Way into the Future.’ Crown Publications (1 Feb 2000) p104

Opinions voiced by Global Minds do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Global Journal.

theglobaljournal.net: Latest articles of James Parker

Montreal Protocol Approach To Climate Crisis

Towards a New Paradigm