The UN-sponsored Conference of the Parties (Cop) concluded its deliberations on climate change last weekend in Egypt. The results were disappointing.
Expecting agreement from nearly 200 governments on urgent action to tackle climate change was always a big ask. With a significant number of countries, such as Saudi Arabia, potentially facing major loss of income in the medium term from ending the use of fossil fuels, there was always going to be serious resistance to change, even though the long-term costs of inaction are likely to be huge. Partly as a result of such disruptive forces, no headway was made on agreeing global measures to hold the rise in temperature to 1.5 degrees by 2050.
The one area of progress was a limited agreement that richer countries provide funding for the poorest nations to help combat the impending damage to their societies.
In the absence of urgent action by major world economies, it is clear that the temperature rise will be significantly greater than 1.5 degrees by 2050, and could well exceed two degrees. Under these circumstances, the world as a whole, and Ireland in particular, needs to take action to prepare for the consequences of a much warmer world.
As with any insurance policy, the cost of doing too much to protect our cities is likely to be much less than the costs of doing too little
Science tells us that as the temperature rises above 1.5 degrees, the prospects for the planet deteriorate very rapidly. There is great uncertainty about these effects. If the rise in temperature triggers the melting of much of the ice in the Arctic and Antarctic, the effects would be truly dramatic, causing a very large rise in sea level. For island nations such as Ireland, the resulting flooding of coastal cities would be exceptionally damaging. As a result, work needs to begin soon on measures to protect crucial infrastructure, in particular our cities, from the effects of rising sea levels.
Planning for London’s Thames barrier to protect London from flooding commenced in the 1970s, and it was finished in the 1980s. In recent years, It has proved vital in protecting London from the effects of rising sea level and increased storm surges. It has been closed more than 200 times to save London from potentially drowning – and it has worked. However, it is clear that it will need massive upgrading because of the continuing rise in global temperature.
As with any insurance policy, the cost of doing too much to protect our cities is likely to be much less than the costs of doing too little. As a result, it is wise to plan for a temperature rise of over 2 degrees after 2050, while still hoping that the world will see sense and avoid such an outcome.
Because of the massive costs of investment to protect Dublin, Cork, Galway and Limerick, work needs to begin soon. We need to learn from countries such as the Netherlands, which has been building defences for centuries against rising sea levels.
Leverage
While we should plan for the worst, the prospect of unchecked global warming is so daunting for Ireland and the wider EU that it increases the pressure to take action today. However, we also need most of the world to follow suit. With no prospect of an effective global agreement, how can the EU best leverage its position to produce change elsewhere in the world?
Europe should introduce a tax on imports of carbon-intensive goods from countries that do not price carbon emissions appropriately
The first policy strand is to invest heavily in developing the technologies needed to move to net-zero emissions. The US has already committed very large resources to this approach. If research and development of renewable electricity make it the cheap option, then market forces will see the rest of the world give up on fossil fuels. Already China is the biggest investor in renewable energy – even without signing up to a global agreement.
The second policy strand is to drive decarbonisation at home. This is best done by making the fossil-fuel option the expensive one. Already Ireland is committed to this approach. However, getting the price right is only a start. Much of the burden of adjustment will need to be funded by the State, especially for low-income families.
The third essential strand of policy is that Europe should introduce a tax on imports of carbon-intensive goods from countries that do not price carbon emissions appropriately. If the EU fails to do so, dirty industry will move offshore and remain dirty. On the other hand, an EU tax on imported goods based on dirty technologies would encourage third countries to change how they produce. As the goods we import have a high carbon content, this would reduce Ireland’s carbon footprint.
