COP26 – a turning point in environmental history
PAGBABAGO
A worrisome finding during a recent Pulse Asia survey is that “environmental destruction” ranks only no. 12 among our “most urgent national concerns,” and that it is not even on the list of the seven personal concerns. Yet, the most urgent personal concern (“staying healthy”) and (“controlling inflation and increase in pay of workers,”) priority national concerns, can only be achieved with our ability to address the current environmental crisis.
“A 1.5 degree future is the only viable future for humanity” was the dire warning of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres when he opened the Conference on Climate Change in Glasgow Scotland where 100 leaders of the world were gathered. Guterres described as “code red” COP26, the 12-day meeting on climate change that started last Oct. 31.
COP26 sent a message – that it is a “turning point” for all countries of the world and especially for the countries who pledged in Paris to do something but had not done enough to meet the targets. What is needed now is not “blah, blah, blah” or promises, but “action” says Greta Thunberg, environmental activist and a Nobel Laureate. “We need to act now, with a strong resolve.”
The difference between 1.5 degree C and 2 degree C is two extra inches of sea level rise which means putting an extra 10 million people at risk of coastal flooding and related problems. The extra warming would lead to greater decline in fisheries crop production. Thus, the need for a shift from making commitments to putting all our energies into wholehearted application.
But even under the most optimistic scenarios, this desired future will not be able to meet the target in current emissions by 2030 as countries like China, the United States, and India have failed to do their part.
At best, the meeting should be able to enforce commitments like pricing carbon dioxide emissions where wealthier countries can compensate for their higher emissions by financing clean energy in developing countries or helping restore carbon-absorbing ecosystems like rainforests. A Green Climate Fund will help countries either in developing sustainable agriculture and building cooling facilities. The United States which is one of the heaviest polluters would have to catch up for lost times and rebuild trust.
A report from UP School of Economics JC Punongbayan further notes that at the local scene, we must also prepare for the possible scenarios expected of Island countries. While we may not experience the grim consequences that countries like Seychelles, where climate change could reduce its 115 islands to less than 50, or Maldives, a favorite tourist destination which could disappear unless the 1.5 degree C is maintained.
In the Philippines, the continuing rise of sea level could start to claim some of the smaller islands of our 7,100.
Greenpeace had noted that six Asian cities are at risk of turning into “water cities” by 2030 because of extreme weather changes – Bangkok, Jakarta, Manila, Taipei, Seoul, and Hongkong. The prediction is that some 1.54 million people in Manila and 37.29 sqm of land area can be affected. The sinking of Metro Manila by a rate of 10 cm. annually is a consequence of rapid extraction of ground waste due to population growth and urbanization. By 2050, many of the Philippine coastal regions including Manila Bay could be underwater due to effects of climate change, according to geologist Mahar Lagmay. The consequences would be a deepening of inequalities among the 13 million people who live in the National Capital Region.
The other “grim” scenario for us in the country is, reportedly, the threat of lack of gas supply by 2027, which is only five years from now. With the end of adequate supply, we shall have rotating brownouts or blackouts in Luzon which could last 12-24 hours daily. This would result in closures of malls, offices, even schools, and will certainly have drastic effects on our economy.
Today, even our limited supply from the 83,000-hectare Malampaya, our only alternative natural gas field located northwest of Palawan is threatened because of the takeover by Dennis Uy, through his Udenna Corporation which obtained 90 percent shares. Earlier, supply was shared by three companies – Shell (45 percent), Chevron (45 percent), and PNOC or the Philippine National Oil Company, But since 2019 Udenna Corporation bought one half of shares of Chevron and in 2021 another half of Shell. Thus, Malampaya is now controlled by Dennis Uy. With this takeover, Uy can connect with Reed Bank in the West Philippine sea which is just 100 km away.
Last October, concerned citizens filed a case against Energy Secretary Alfonso Cusi, officials of PNOC, and Dennis Uy – on the charge of the sale being a “crony agreement” because of their close relationship to the President. The takeover of Malampaya means it could be a bridge towards joint development in the West Philippine Sea with China.
The above developments should be carefully watched because of its implications not only on our sovereignty over our waters, but also on its environmental impact.
My email, florangel.braid@gmail.com