By Cristina Fernandez Pereda
Buenos Aires just held the tenth Climate Change Summit. Delegations from 189 countries began the meetings with optimism believing that Russia would ratify the Kyoto Protocol and permit its implementation. However, enthusiasm has given way to doubts about whether Kyoto is the best weapon against climate changes.
The international community pushes for the implementation of the Protocol which must be in effect by 2012. Meanwhile, countries like England, Australia and the United States, announce that they will not fulfill the demands of the protocol. They will not adopt the measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions or invest in research to that end.
Experts on climate changes gathered in Buenos Aires have assured that a fight against the effects of global warming does not have to start with the implementation of a series of measures that reduce gas emissions into the atmosphere. They feel that this fight should begin with an assault on poverty.
The lack of resources transforms developing countries in the most indefensible against climatic changes. In 1998, the hurricane Mitch killed 10,000 people in Central America. In 2004, another hurricane of equal magnitude hit a residential area in Florida and 20 people died. The wealth of developed countries reduces the harms of any climatic phenomenon.
The high costs of the implementation of the measures approved in Kyoto make many want to rethink them. The most optimistic estimations put the costs between $150,000 and $300,000 million per year. The less developed countries have proposed an alternative to the Protocol. They want to invest aid to the countries most vulnerable to climate changes.
Joke Waller, executive secretary of the conference, noted that there have been advances made towards adapting the poorest countries to climate changes. Her proposal consists in that the less developed countries present their adaptation plans and that the industrialized countries finance them. The delegate of Tanzania, on behalf of the 48 poorest countries of the world, argued in favor of these measures saying that “for us climate change is more catastrophic than terrorism.”
The changes in weather provoke massive floods en coastal areas and in the riversides where many people live. The inundations reduce the amount of cultivable land and thereby hunger spreads. The experts also argue that these changes increase the number of people without access to drinkable water, which increases the risk of disease and reduces the availability of food.
Climate change, natural disasters, poverty, and assaults upon the environment make up a chain that is difficult to break. The investments in the most vulnerable countries could help reduce the catastrophic effects. The help for these nations to protect themselves from the harms that many industrialized countries provoke can prevent more poverty and lost lives when the floods come.
No Comments