Denmark as a policy discourages the use of automobiles. According to our thoughtful Afghan cabbie Yunus, cars are absurdly expensive thanks to the 200 per cent vehicle tax. So a car that could be yours for Dh. 60,000 in the UAE will demand something in the range of Dh. 600,000 or 700,000 Danish kroner. No wonder bicycle is the favoured mode of public transport.This preoccupation with environment and conservation of natural resources is not limited to cycling. It manifests itself everywhere - in as insignificant things as toilets that offer ‘half and full' flush options to the extensive use of wind turbines to harness natural energy.
The world's largest wind farm - capable of supplying carbon-free, clean electricity to some 200,000 households - is in Denmark. The first was set up in as early as 1891. Environment and green technologies are big business in most Scandinavian countries. With their rich financial and natural resources and relatively small populations, they can probably afford to have stringent environment norms and regulations in place and even implement them, which large developing countries such as India and Brazil can't - for these very reasons.
But there's another explanation why Scandinavian countries are obsessed with climate change. With their proximity to the North Pole and with the arctic ice fast melting, the Nordic nations may be among the first victims of global warming.
Ultimately though, I suppose, it all comes down to a people's attitude and their priorities and concerns. Nations like Denmark have invested a great deal of hard work over the years in environment conservation, just as they have jealously guarded their history, monuments and architectural marvels.
Denmark has a long history of environment protection and energy conservation. The government in Copenhagen has for years worked with industry leaders and energy giants to invest in clean and renewable energy, long before the rest of the world heard of the Kyoto Protocol (1997) recommending global emission cuts.
The country began investing in renewable and clean energy after the 1973 oil crisis. By imposing high taxes on automobiles and fossil fuels, the country has managed to keep itself largely free of carbon emissions even as its economy has grown by leaps and bounds over the past quarter century.
Denmark's feisty Minister of Climate and Energy, Connie Hedegaard says, "In 1973 we got 99 per cent of our energy and electricity from the Middle Eastern oil. Today it's zero." Little wonder, Denmark's carbon footprint is one of the lowest in the world, which is probably why the country has been chosen to host the climate change summit in December. World leaders and environment experts will meet in the Danish capital to hammer out a new treaty on reducing carbon emissions responsible for climate change.
While scientists and environment experts are getting increasingly desperate for urgent steps to deal with the problem, warning of serious consequences, most governments are yet to demonstrate they understand the gravity of the threat. Climate experts suspect it may already be too late to reverse the catastrophic effects of climate change on the planet. Even if all countries go for the proposed 20 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2020, we may not meet the target of bringing down global temperatures by 2 per cent, which is why a done deal in December is so crucial to all of us.
As former UN chief Kofi Annan put it in his characteristic understated manner at the Global Editors' Forum in Copenhagen recently, climate change is not an abstract issue of academic debate anymore. It is an existential threat to mankind. This is a global problem and demands a global solution.
Annan reminded the West that even though global warming is the direct consequence of the rich, industrialised world's reckless abuse of nature for decades, the world's poorest and most vulnerable countries are paying the price for its actions.
Bangladesh's Foreign Minister Dr Hasan Mahmoud delivered it on the nose when he drew parallels between the sinking of HMS Titanic and global meltdown. Dr Mahmud warned the rich, industrialised nations that just as when Titanic went down taking with it both first class passengers and those below the deck, the climate crisis would target rich nations like the US and poor ones like Bangladesh.
The minister delivered the warning sitting next to the US Assistant Secretary for Energy David Sandalow.
Bangladesh has enough reasons to get nervous about the outcome of climate change initiatives and what rich countries like the US will deliver at the Copenhagen summit.
Because while the climate crisis threatens everyone on the planet, low-lying countries like Bangladesh and Maldives face an immediate threat of being swallowed up by rising sea levels. President Mohamad Nasheed of the Maldives dived into the Arabian sea with his entire cabinet to underscore this point.
The Bangla minister insists the historic responsibility for the climate change lies with the West, particularly America. "The US has been the biggest violator of environment for the past 150 years or so," points out the former academic. "It has to take the lead in global initiatives on climate change. It has to deliver Copenhagen and not only agree to cut carbon emissions but also provide the vital financial and technological support to vulnerable nations like Bangladesh. If we fail in Copenhagen, it will be a huge disaster for mankind."
Agrees Denmark's Connie Hedgegaard. "We can't afford to fail. If we don't deliver this December in Copenhagen, it will be years before political momentum is built and another such initiative to save the planet is launched. We just can't miss this bus."
That's it. We can't miss the bus in Copenhagen. But what eventually happens in December wouldn't be determined by Bangladesh or Denmark. It will be decided by the US, the world's biggest economy and industrial power, and perhaps by emerging economic giants China and India. The world will follow if the US takes the lead. Else collective failure will lead to collective doom. So what would President Obama do in Copenhagen? Lead from the front or shrug off America's responsibility just as Bush did? I can't wait for December.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed