For most of us, climate change remains an abstract threat, but for some of the world’s poorest nations, it is already a painful reality. Countries like Bangladesh are already buffeted by cyclones and floods that hit more frequently and with more intensity than in the past. Others, on the contrary, suffer severe draughts. In both cases, extreme weather patterns wipe out livelihoods and keep millions trapped in poverty.These facts will form the background for the haggling expected to take place between developed and developing nations during the conference. Keeping track of the goals and commitments announced by the major players isn’t always easy for non-experts. What is clear, however, is that a successful outcome will require political leadership and vision from all parties.
Politicians are notoriously reluctant to focus on goals beyond their current mandate, particularly in our era of short-termism. Yet, in this particular instance, the shape of the future will depend on 192 nations striking a fair deal between the rich nations, responsible for three-quarters of the carbon pollution emitted since the industrial revolution, and developing nations that deserve the same opportunity to grow. Rich nations will have to dig into their pockets to reduce their own emissions but also to promote sustainable growth in the developing world and limit the damage to our planet. Some estimates put at up to $100 billion the amount needed annually to help poorer countries finance cleaner growth, on top of billions already pledged for aid.
US President Barack Obama has announced he would attend the summit. His pledge of reducing carbon emissions by 17 percent, although an improvement on the obstructionism displayed by his predecessor, remains below what is expected of the world’s worst polluter. Developing countries like China, India and South Africa have set important targets, but their commitment is linked in part to that of their richer counterparts.
Where does Turkey stand on climate change? As a developing country, Turkey was not required to meet binding targets under the Kyoto treaty, which it ratified belatedly this year. But, as a fast growing economy, currently the world’s 17th and, furthermore, a country that sees itself as a regional leader and is an EU candidate country, Turkey cannot afford to shirk its responsibilities.
Between 1990 and 2007, carbon emissions have increased by 119 percent. Environmental activists acknowledge that the government has become more aware of environmental protection, but they demand more action now. Laws have been passed to promote renewable energy and increase efficiency, but no legislation currently requires companies to publish their carbon footprint.
Hilal Atıcı, climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace Mediterranean, deplores the fact that the government is still issuing licenses to build coal power plants -- 47 projects are currently under way -- and is planning another tender for nuclear energy instead of focusing more on renewables.
Greenpeace pointed out in a recent comparison of three energy scenarios for Turkey that aside from benefiting the environment, promoting renewable energy would also create many new jobs. In the medium term, the cost difference between maintaining the current, damaging trends and adopting cleaner policies would be almost negligible.
Environment Minister Veysel Eroğlu recently said Turkey would pledge an 11 percent reduction by 2020 from its “business as usual” projections. This isn’t enough, Greenpeace argue, asking instead for a 30 percent decrease. The Turkish government has recently taken bold moves with political overtures abroad and at home. The government could now focus on climate change and show that in environmental policy too, Turkey is ambitious.
