It is very sad that what we currently know has nothing to do with what we do. After all, almost all people now do not know that we are facing the greatest catastrophe we can face. However, very few make the necessary changes, especially based on their own habits such as driving, flying and consuming meat and dairy products.
During this time of crisis, Britain chose a less aggressive government. The Westminster government and local authorities continue to build roads and expand airports. According to an analysis by the World Wide Fund for Nature, the UK’s latest budget allocated 5 145 million for environmental work, but $ 40 billion for measures to increase emissions.
Government policy aimed at “maximizing economic gains” by the extraction of oil and gas in the UK is currently shocking. According to the government’s energy policy, the UK is “an attractive destination for global investors” by continuing to extract. It is said to be “the best way to ensure a successful transition from traditional fossil fuels”.
Yet the twisted argument is hard to imagine. If you strive for unmatched goals, logic will usually come to mind.
Gasoline in flames
Now that our house is on fire, the British government is spraying petrol on the fire. With the financial contribution of fossil fuel companies, Boris Johnson seems to be on the way to approving Combo’s plans for a new oil field in the North Sea. At the same time as climate scientists have long declared that there is no real chance of preventing global warming above 1.5 degrees unless all new extractions of fossil fuels are stopped. Instead, existing projects should also be completed.
Or we will not be able to achieve the government’s official target of zero emissions by 2050. Another sign of the distance between knowledge and action. Britain’s climate goals need to be changed immediately by drastic measures, but those in power do not want to touch on this issue.
Less Promise – Give Less
We can see similar trends in every government around the world. Joe Biden’s promises for a green change soon turned into empty words. Although Biden has promised to ban new extraction and so-called fraud on public land, his administration has already issued more than 2,000 new permits. Biden’s national security advisers have demanded that the oil hut OPEC + increase its production so that U.S. citizens can continue to drive their monster cars. Some say there is a desire for radical action behind Biden’s modest rhetoric. But the words used set limits on what can be achieved, and the less promising the less the giver.
All the promises to prevent climate change would be meaningless if we continued to extract fossil fuels. Atmosphere does not care about gestures. It is unaffected by promises and uninteresting in words. It has no phalanxes or deceptive and distracting voters.
Governments around the world reject the testimony and reporting of climate scientists. If governments really take information seriously, they will change their policies entirely in accordance with scientific advice. At the same time, such a definition of political freedom would be considered unacceptable not only by politicians but also in terms of the philosophy on which our democracy is based.
What do state attorneys do?
But is that really so? When it comes to business interests, governments are happy to be low. The British oil company is currently suing the Italian government for losing “expected future profits” after Italy banned the drilling of new oil in coastal waters. Italy has previously signed what is known as the Energy Charter, which allows companies to seek compensation if future projects are halted. According to one clause, this can happen even if the countries withdraw from the agreement, which means that even if they leave the agreement in 2016, they can still sue Italy.
This is one of the many examples of agreements between investors and states that make effective measures against the climate crisis almost impossible. This is an outrageous restriction of political freedom, which our governments clearly accept.
I don’t know how we can escape with such agreements, but this issue should have a higher priority among state attorneys. Otherwise, it means that future corporate profits are officially more important than life on earth.
Takes small points
The global emergency needs a new policy, but no such vision. Governments fear lobby groups even more than our ecosystems collapse. They make decisions with big and irreversible consequences only to win small and irrelevant political points. MEPs in the UK, who are not interested in poor people and have often voted harder for vulnerable groups, are now arguing that sudden climate action is hurting these groups.
The finance ministry is also refusing to authorize spending to meet the government’s adequate climate targets. Boris Johnson is responsible for presenting the global climate responsibility issue at the Glasgow Summit in November. Unfortunately, Johnson is capable of regret and mischief, but is unable to make politically difficult decisions.
New protocol guide
No government, even the most progressive government, is ready to seriously consider the change we need: a global agreement that prioritizes climate change. We need not only a new policy, but also a new ethical guide. We need to bridge the gap between knowledge and action. We need to speed up the conversation that is still thriving.
This text was previously published in The Guardian.
Translation: Corinne Platon.
“Passionate beer ninja. Extreme problem solver. Thinker. Professional web fan. Avid communicator. Hardcore troublemaker.”