Catherine Conlon: A better future is possible

The Stone Age did not end because we ran out of stones, it ended because there were better alternatives. The age of oil and gas must be the same

Picture: David Creedon/Anzenberger

Any notion that Ireland can reach the legally required 51% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 is now "fanciful" according to environmental journalist John Gibbons. 

This after it emerged emissions rose by 20% in the first quarter of this year, the third-highest hike in the EU after Bulgaria and Malta.

Ireland may have continued an upward slope in greenhouse gas emissions but there is more positive news from much of Europe. The Netherlands and Finland recorded a dip in emissions in the first quarter of 2022 while Europe remains below the level of pre-Covid emissions recorded in 2019.

An extraordinary article in the New York Times (August 16, 2022) had an apology from professor of environmental engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dr Charles Harvey and Kurt House CEO of KoBold Metals. 

Entitled ‘Every dollar spent on this climate technology is a waste’ referring to carbon capture and storage (CCS) – the process of gathering carbon dioxide released from coal burning at power plants before it makes it to the atmosphere and burying it in the ground.

Ireland may have continued an upward slope in greenhouse gas emissions but there is more positive news from much of Europe. Picture: RollingNews.ie

"What the technology, known as CCS, does is allow for the continued production of oil and natural gas at a time when the world should be ending its dependence on fossil fuels" stated the authors. 

Climate and sustainability commentator Edmund Carlevale, suggests that this is a "breath-taking mea culpa" from MIT and queries "is it possible that the MIT community is waking up?" 

Are we reaching the tipping point for decisive action on climate change as opposed to aspiration, empty words, and hollow promises?

Doomism about climate change has become a pervading theme centring on the idea that it is too late to avoid runaway climate change as well as the likelihood of a mass extinction event – this feeds into the interests of fossil fuel players.

Michael Mann in The New Climate War (2021) states that there is no scientific evidence whatsoever for these claims. Climate model simulations in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (2014) provide no support at all for a runaway warming scenario at even 40C or 50C, let alone 30C which is where current policies are likely taking us as we slowly begin to decarbonise the economy. 

In terms of "mass extinction" the most comprehensive study to date published in Nature (2020) found that less than 2% of species will undergo collapse from climate change if planetary warming is kept below 20 C and 15% of species if warming reaches 40C. Troubling – yes, but "mass extinction" – no.

Neither does scientific evidence support much reported climate "feedbacks" – that game – changing, planet-melting methane time bomb. The UK climate scientist Richard Betts states that even if the self-perpetuating changes begin in a few decades, "the process would take a long time to kick in – centuries or millennia". 

In terms of stabilising climate warming at 20C – the obstacles to achieving this are not physical at this point – only political. Claims that industrial nations are off course to meet the Paris commitments are also questionable. 

China, the world’s largest emitter, is on course to meet its Paris target early and some analysts suggest that the US is also on target – despite Trump and his anti-climate agenda for four very long years.

Water flows out from a gate of the Shuikou Hydropower Station in southeastern China's Fujian Province in June 2022. China is the world's largest emitter but is on course to meet its Paris target early. Picture: Lin Shanchuan/Xinhua via AP

The factors that have propelled us to taking climate change seriously include the unprecedented climate disasters in recent years right up to the recent weeks of broiling temperatures in Europe accompanied by droughts and forest fires; a reawakening of environmental activism – particularly among children that has helped to frame climate change as the key challenge of this century; and the global pandemic that has taught us key lessons about vulnerability and risk. 

These factors, coming together are pushing, finally, us towards a tipping point for climate change action.

Social transitions are often not gradual but sudden and dramatic - reaching a "tipping point" for mass change. This happened in Ireland with support for marriage equality in 2015, the growth of the #MeToo movement, following the exposure of sexual abuse allegations against Harvey Weinstein in 2017; and attitudes towards racial injustice in the US following the killing of a black man, George Floyd, by US police, captured on video in 2020.

Key ingredients edging us closer to that tipping point on climate change action include the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, incentivising decentralised energy generation, building carbon neutral cities, divesting from assets linked to fossil fuels, climate education and disclosing greenhouse gas information.

Critically, the banking and financial industry are rethinking their role in funding the fossil fuel industry. As the economy is decarbonised, fossil fuels are a less-attractive investment – including trillions of dollars in coal mines, oil wells, power stations and conventional vehicles with the threat of fossil fuel reserves and production facilities becoming stranded assets.

The stone age did not end because we ran out of stones. It ended because a better future was possible. The fossil fuel age will end because the burning of fossil fuels is a threat to a sustainable future and because something better has arrived – renewable energy.

Youth activism has played a key role in bringing the crisis of climate change centre stage and was instrumental in the Irish government declaring a "climate emergency" in 2019. Thirty-nine other countries, including the UK have also taken this key step.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

The pandemic taught us important lessons about handling a global threat. A key lesson is the role of science in policy-making. Countries that listened to the science did much better in the pandemic than those who did not. 

Who could forget Leo Varadkar’s state of nation address from the steps of the Irish Embassy in Washington DC in March 2020 when the country went into lockdown? 

Leo Varadkar took a scientific approach to the pandemic back in 2020. Picture: Aidan Crawley/EPA-EFE POOL PIC

"In years to come let them say of us, when things were at their worst, we were at our best." 

Measured, calm, clear, and based on scientific advice from strong academic and public health institutions.

Contrast this to countries that did not listen to the science. Boris Johnson, under guidance from his advisers delayed lockdown in a misguided attempt to reach "herd immunity". 

The US also paid a high price for not listening to the science and acting quickly to avoid danger, in a misguided attempt led by Trump to thwart a slowing of the economy and potential impacts on re-election.

The  Covid-19 pandemic underscored the importance of strong institutions and government that have an obligation to protect the welfare of their citizens by organising evidence-based response, alleviating economic disruption, and maintaining a functioning social safety net. On all these fronts, Ireland performed well.

These lessons apply equally to handling climate change. Time to end the reliance on euphemisms and empty promises and recognise the delaying tactics of vested interests for what they are if we are to meet legally bound obligations over the next two decades.

Dr Catherine Conlon is a public health doctor in Cork and former Director of Human Health and Nutrition, safefood.

CLIMATE & SUSTAINABILITY HUB