By Francesca Davis
1998 was a record year for hurricanes, droughts, floods and other "natural" disasters. Fifty-six countries were hit by severe flooding, and at least 45 were stricken by drought. The events displaced millions and killed thousands. Most recently, hurricane Mitch devastated people's lives and the economies of Central America. Australia has not been immune, with freak flooding in Wollongong and other coastal regions.
It is tempting to blame the changes on some greater force that lies out of our control. However, the reason for climate change is much more earthly. It is the refusal of the United States government and big business to control fossil fuel pollution. US intransigence has blocked efforts to deal with the global warming crisis at every turn.
The US is responsible for over a third of total world greenhouse gas emissions. With around 4.5% of the world's population, in 1990 the US emitted 36.1% of all greenhouse gas emissions.
Greenhouse gas emissions in the US are soaring and are predicted to increase 30% from 1990 levels by 2010.
Despite the urgency of the issue, no action has been taken since the Kyoto climate change summit in December 1997 to tackle domestic fossil fuel use, although US$1 billion will be spent on clean energy research next year. At Kyoto, the US agreed to reduce its emissions by 7% from 1990 levels by 2010.
The US government has prevented implementation of the Kyoto agreement by arguing for measures that render it toothless and blatantly unfair to developing countries.
The Kyoto protocol decided on a cut in emissions by 38 developed countries by 5.2% between 2008 and 2012.
'Inaction plan'
The Buenos Aires conference, held in early November, was meant to work out the rules for its implementation. The main issue was how a mechanism of trading in carbon pollution "rights" should work.
The idea is for each country to issue pollution permits that match its target for greenhouse gas pollution. If emissions can be reduced by installing cleaner technology, then businesses or governments can sell its "excess" pollution rights to another business or country.
The European Union and Third World nations want a cap put on tradable emissions to ensure that real action to cut emissions is taken domestically in each country. The US has argued for no limits on trading.
If this were accepted, the US could continue increasing its emissions of greenhouse gases, but buy pollution credits from other countries, thus appearing to have met its Kyoto target. It would make a mockery of the agreement.
Unable to get beyond this point, the Buenos Aires conference could decide only to set the year 2000 as the deadline for final agreement on the rules. The outcome has been dubbed the "Buenos Aires Inaction Plan".
The US government also wants to overturn the Kyoto decision that only developed countries should first be required to cut emissions. The rich capitalist industrialised countries are responsible for 80% of greenhouse gas pollution.
Third World
The US argues that Third World countries should also have targets because countries like China and India will emit more than the US by next century.
However, China currently emits only 8% of all greenhouse gases. On a per capita basis, China and India will take decades to catch up to the US. According to an article by Worldwatch Institute researcher Seth Dunn, most developing countries have per capita emissions less than 10% of US levels.
The US Senate, violently opposed to the treaty, has focused on the "unfair" nature of the Kyoto protocol as an excuse not to ratify it. No other industrialised country has made inclusion of reductions by Third World countries a precondition for action on global warming. This is not to say that countries like Australia and Japan have not taken advantage of US stalling.
The US government's position corresponds to the attitude of US big business, as revealed in a letter from the US Business Roundtable to US negotiator Stuart Eisensatz, leaked to Friends of the Earth. The Business Roundtable is a coalition of companies, including oil giant Exxon and car maker General Motors, whose major concern is to minimise the costs to business of any treaty and to maximise the US companies' competitive advantage over Europe and the Third World.
The letter referred to a study by the Roundtable which shows that through unlimited pollution trading, US business can save most of the cost of compliance by buying credits from other countries rather than reducing emissions. It noted that a cap would give the EU an advantage because the EU has already taken action to develop energy efficiency, while the US has not.
The letter reiterated the demand that Third World countries be required to begin immediately to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Powerful oil, gas and automobile industries, allied in the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), have seized on the exclusion of the Third World to depict the Kyoto agreement as unfair. The GCC ran a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign in the US prior to the Buenos Aires meeting claiming the Kyoto treaty is not really global.
This same group, before the Kyoto summit, argued that global warming is not a problem.
Hypocrisy
The hypocrisy of demanding that underdeveloped countries also cut greenhouse gas emissions is highlighted by the fact that many of the corporations in the GCC and the US Roundtable profit from investments in fossil fuel projects in the Third World.
According to Daphnie Wysham, coordinator of the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network, "Although earmarked for sustainable development and poverty relief, nine out of 10 World Bank fossil fuel projects benefit transnational corporations based in the wealthy countries — many of which are members of the Global Climate Coalition that actively opposes any action on climate change".
The effects of global warming are already being felt in the Third World, made worse by the environmental destruction caused by economic activities of the rich capitalist countries. The massive landslides in Nicaragua and Honduras after hurricane Mitch were partly the result of deforestation carried out by multinational timber companies over the last decade.
US big business is conscious of its role in prolonging underdevelopment, environmental destruction and human misery in the Third World. The Business Roundtable letter acknowledges that unlimited carbon pollution trading will damage the economies of underdeveloped countries.
Third World countries succeeded in keeping discussion of their inclusion in emission reduction off the agenda at Buenos Aires.
"When it comes to taking responsibilities, some countries would like to shirk their obligations while raising 'new ideas' about how the agreement should be implemented", said India's environment minister, Sri Suresh Prabhu. He insisted that rich industrialised countries must meet their emission targets before underdeveloped countries become involved.
Nevertheless, Argentina and Kazakhstan have decided voluntarily to cut emissions, and 20 other countries are also considering reductions.
In an attempt to retain some credibility, the US finally signed the Kyoto agreement last week, the last of the key industrialised countries to do so. Even this purely token gesture created uproar in US business circles and their supporters in Congress.
Action urgent
Congress' position is out of step with the majority of the US people. According to the World Wide Fund for Nature, 71% disapprove of congressional efforts to block emission controls and would support a treaty even if Third World countries do not agree to cut emissions.
In the face of the frightening evidence of the reality of global warming presented to the delegates in Buenos Aires, and a message from Green parties across the world reminding them that a carbon dioxide reduction of 50-70% is necessary to contain climate change, the conference's failure to implement a total cut of 5.2% is alarming.
While the US remains hostile to global action on greenhouse gas emissions, debilitating weather disruption will continue. This year alone the social costs are enormous: 13,000 people were killed in hurricane Mitch; 56 million were displaced by flooding in China; 21 million were made homeless by floods in Bangladesh; 3000 people died in a heat wave in India.
Next century, the situation will rapidly worsen unless US big business and its government are forced to change. By 2050, an extra 30 million people will go hungry because of drought, 170 million will suffer water shortages, 200 million will be displaced by floods, and 60% of the world's population will get malaria. By the end of the century, the Amazon rainforest will be a desert.
[The disasters aren't "natural": see pages 16-17.]