Letters to the Editor: Ireland pays a big price for its small input into global warming
'Overall, the G20 countries are responsible for over 70% of the global total emissions.'
Understanding the scientific basis for Ireland’s relatively minor contribution to global warming and emissions is a prerequisite to understanding Ireland’s responsibility on climate matters.
According to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the World Bank, Ireland’s current contribution to global warming is a miniscule 0.1105% of the world total.
Because of our colonial past, Ireland has no historical responsibility for global warming.
It is a scientific fact the major polluters are members of the G20 countries such as China (15bn tonnes of Co2 equivalent), the USA (5.9bn tonnes), India (2.3bn tonnes), the EU (3.8bn tonnes), Russia (2.5bn tonnes).
Overall, the G20 countries are responsible for over 70% of the global total emissions.
According to the UK-based Chatham House, unaccounted emissions from wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and many other conflicts throughout the world contribute several billion tonnes per annum, equivalent to more than 5% of the global total.
Global military operations, also unaccounted, are responsible for 6% of the global total.
Like many small islands throughout the world, Ireland is a recipient and importer of global warming and should not be conflated with the big polluters outlined above.
In terms of climate targets, a competent government can argue that Ireland has already complied with the more nuanced advice of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; to reduce emissions commensurate with our responsibility.
Also, it can be demonstrated that Ireland has acted responsibly in introducing carbon taxes, investing heavily in infrastructure, in electrifying and expanding public transport, active travel and greenways, as well as providing substantial grant aid for EVs, retrofitting homes and promoting wind and solar energy.
Ireland is now facing an existential threat against increasing violent storms with massive disruptive effects on our infrastructure, homes, and businesses.
It is unconscionable therefore that Ireland will have to pay EU fines, particularly when the EU itself is pulling back on climate commitments such as the Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) and the Emissions Trading System (ETS) pillar policies, as well as the review of phasing out petrol and diesel cars by 2030.
Clearly, Government must now act pragmatically and with common sense, to concentrate all resources on adaption and resilience as a matter of extreme urgency.
There has been much very justifiable criticism of the interview with foreign affairs minister Helen McEntee on on RTÉ Radio One, on February 16.
I would like to address a specific concern in relation to that interview and in relation to much of what is issued by government spokespersons that does not receive so much attention but is, nonetheless, very worrying.
Our Government is attempting to intimidate, frighten, embarrass, and shame us into abandoning our neutrality through the use of ‘magic language’.
Ms McEntee deployed this strategy in a very obvious and shameful way when she used the word ‘ambitious’ at least eight times in that short interview.
‘Ambitious’ is a magic word. It always sounds as if it is good — we should be ambitious.
But, ambitious to do what? Jack the Ripper was ambitious. He wanted to kill as many unfortunate women as he could.
‘Responsible’ is another magic word you will hear from the Government.
Responsible is good — we should be responsible.
But, again, responsible for what? Jack the Ripper was responsible for the brutal murders of at least five women.
‘Real world’ is a magic term.
It sounds as if the terrible reality of our current situation is unavoidable and inevitable and that there is nothing we can do about it, whereas ‘fantasy’ works in the opposite direction.
It is made to sound bad, immature, delusional, and stupid.
I would rather dream of a better world — and act on those dreams, than simply accept, and sleep-walk into, the inevitability of the ‘real nightmare’ of a world war three.
We must be awake to this clever but terribly over-used trick of the Government, and some people in the media.
Pay attention to the language they are using. Look out for the ‘magic words’.
Do not allow them to pull this cheap stunt — trying to programme and brainwash us. We are smarter than that.
Do we, the general public, need to know of searches and investigations pertaining to the disappearance of Jo Jo Dullard and Deirdre Jacob, from their commencement?
Surely the families of these two (or other) missing people should be allowed to hope in private and not have their awaiting silhouetted in public gaze.
An intergenerational divide has been created between the younger generation and those fortunate to own a home.
Leaving aside landlords (who also have an important role to play), most citizens lucky enough to own a home have done so through 35 or 40 years of hard work.
There is an intergenerational transfer of wealth occurring at present (mostly in the form of property) from those in their 80s to those in their 50s.
The End Discrimination in Inheritance Tax Campaign group has offered a partial solution to the housing crisis faced by young people in their 20s and 30s through radical reform of the inheritance tax regime.
It makes no sense whatsoever for a nephew or niece who may be fortunate enough to inherit a home valued at €400,000 from a childless relative to then be saddled with an inheritance tax bill of €120,000 and for that cherished family home to almost certainly be sold to pay the tax due — often against the wishes of the deceased uncle or aunt.
We want all citizens to have a roof over their heads and for all young people to have the opportunity of owning a home.
We have a divided society between the haves (property owners) and the have-nots (the younger generation).
A transfer of wealth is occurring at present between parents and their children and between childless citizens and their loved ones — this will continue to occur in the next two decades and more.
Younger people may get the opportunity to own their own homes into the future — sadly, it looks like many will just have to wait until their parents and elderly childless relatives pass away.
Unfortunately, younger people may not be able to hang around in Ireland paying exorbitant rents in the meantime.
The entire system is rigged against younger people, and the poverty time bomb is ticking
On Monday, February 16, I watched on RTÉ One.
What I saw will be embedded in my mind forever.
It covered the result of a really bad traffic accident and the effect it had on so many lives.
I wish it could be shown each week until the message might get through to as wide an audience as possible.
To put down on paper the effect the programme had on me — and I am sure on countless other viewers — would be impossible.
I, therefore, appeal to those who are in a position to do so, to ensure the hour-long programme is repeated and well-advertised in advance.
I could so easily have tuned into a different station and therefore missed this documentary.
I have listened to many news reports on TV and radio since but none I have listened to commented on this programme.
The programme itself dealt with the accident scene, the gardaí who attended and the fire brigade and ambulance personnel involved.
It also dealt with the parents of the victims who were trying to connect with family members not knowing if they were already deceased or badly injured.
It also covered the aftermath, the hospital scenes and the horrific injuries suffered by the survivors, some wishing they had died rather than enduring the pain they were experiencing.
It detailed the effects the accident had on the parents of the victims and on the members of the emergency services who attended the scene.
The programme also detailed the post mortem findings and outlined what the victims had consumed in terms of drink and drugs prior to the crash.
As a former member of An Garda Síochána I have visited many accident scenes, some fatal, and I was also injured in accidents, both as a driver and as a passenger.
I well know the aftereffects.
Mark Zuckerberg is in court, apparently for the first time, defending his products from the accusation that they are addictive, and deliberately so.
As a retired, grumpy senior I try to avoid the world of influencers, the latest challenge that may injure me, and online medical advice that could kill me.
Of course much of it is right but how can I tell? I get my medical advice from my local — living — doctor.
The only service I regularly use is YouTube.
I use it as a learning tool, how to use my new coffee machine or how to turn off all of the beeps in our new car.
This sort of information is reliable and accurate but I am still getting videos about coffee grinding a month later.
It keeps feeding me suggestions that I might be and usually am interested in and it’s hard to stop.
I worry when YouTube knows more about me than many of my friends.
