Market forces |


Jeremy Wilcox is managing director of the Energy Partnership, an independent Thailand-based energy and environment consulting firm 8/27 Sukhumvit Soi 8, Klongtoey, Bangkok 10110, Thailand | T: +66 2 653 1263 | Mobile: +66 860993375 | S: energypartnership


From mitigation to reparation


At the latest annual edition of the UN’s annual climate summit in Egypt an agreement was reached to create a fund for compensating poor nations that are victims of extreme weather worsened by rich countries’ carbon pollution, Poorer nations view climate reparations as just, because they are often the victims of floods, droughts and heat waves exacerbated by climate change while having contributed little to the fossil fuel pollution that is heating the world. The concept of climate reparation is based on the principle of social justice whereby everyone deserves equal economic, political, and social rights and opportunities. But the agreement to make reparations excludes China, the world’s second largest economy and largest polluter, as it is classified by the World Bank as a developing country with a forecast per capita income of $11 800 in 2022, which is below the World Bank threshold of $12 275 and compares to a 2021 per capita income of $63 444 in the USA. But consider the relative economic and emission performance of the USA and China between 1995 and 2021. Over this period, US GDP expanded by 210% while its annual greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by 7.5%: while China’s economy has expanded by 2315% and its emissions by 685.6%. In 1995, the US accounted for 24.6% of global GDP and 22.6% of annual emissions, while China accounted for 2.4% of GDP and 6.2% of emissions. In 2021 the US share of global GDP was little changed at 23.9% but its emissions share had fallen to 13.5%, while China’s share of GDP had surged to 18.4% and its emissions share to 31.5%. While the USA and other developed nations are increasing economic productivity while reducing the climate impact, China is expanding both. While developed economies have put in place emission reduction targets and are increasingly legislating for zero-carbon economies by the middle of this century, China has only committed to peak its emissions in 2030, although analysts believe it will achieve this peak ahead of target.


most right-leaning politicians [argue] that


protecting the socio-economic status of their own citizens should take precedence over foreign benevolence.


China’s exclusion from the reparation programme and the general concept that richer countries compensate poorer countries is politically divisive, with left-leaning governments most supportive. Indeed, climate change is fundamentally driven by socialist dogma amid claims that capitalism is the root cause of global warming. The reluctance of right-leaning pro- capitalism governments to financially support poorer nations is currently accentuated by surging inflation and major economies teetering


the science now concedes that a 1.5°C target is no longer achievable, and it has increased its minimum increase to 2°C.


on brink of recession with most right-leaning politicians arguing that protecting the socio- economic status of their own citizens should take precedence over foreign benevolence. But politics aside, if climate change is framed as a global issue, it will require a global response that is fair and proportionate. The UN, through its annual climate summits, has been adopting a globalist approach to climate change since the inaugural Conference of the Parties to the United


it is not possible to produce a global


response that both protects poorer nations while fairly incentivising all nations to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions.


10 | November/December 2022 | www.modernpowersystems.com


Nations Framework on Climate Change in 1995. But this global approach is arguably not working. Central to the climate approach has been the science and the key benchmark of limiting the increase in the Earth’s temperature to below 1.5°C, with scientists claiming an increase above this level will result in large-scale drought, famine, heat stress, species becoming extinct, loss of entire ecosystems, loss of habitable land, and pushing more than 100 million into poverty. But the science now concedes that a 1.5°C target is no longer achievable, and it has increased its minimum increase to 2°C.


When the climate change process commenced the goal was simple; mitigate the dangers by reducing emissions and limit global warming. Cognizant that poor nations needed cheap fossil fuels to power socio-economic growth and reduce poverty, the goal was revised to include climate adaptation if mitigation was not possible. And now, to fund climate adaptation, the UN has included climate reparation.


The inconvenient truth is that the UN approach to climate change has been flawed, even though the central principle of reducing emissions to limit global warming is scientifically sound. The weakness has been the unwritten assumption that by pushing the rich developed nations to reduce emissions it will compensate for emissions growth in the lesser developed nations. But this has been proved false, as global emissions have increased while emissions in Europe and the US have fallen. Indeed global warming is arguably being driven by rising emissions from developing nations, including China, and the agreement reached at COP 27 will essentially see developed nations compensate these poorer countries to help them adapt to their own emissions growth.


While climate change is undeniably a global issue it is not possible to produce a global response that both protects poorer nations while fairly incentivising all nations to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions. This being so the annual UN climate jamboree has run its course.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47