Anyone watching the Glasgow climate 'telethon' would have thought America was actually the good guy. The one with the cleanest shirt. Really? Besides all the unfulfilled pledges over three entire decades, the richer countries have been raining down distorted statistics on us. Let's redress the balance with some alternative numbers.
Exhibit One
The key Missing-in-Action figure is the one about carbon emissions per person. Without that the villains become saints. The ones looting our share of carbon emissions thus get away with (ecological) murder.
Would you say one American is worth more than four Chinese or eleven Indians or Bangladeshis? Hardly. It is so unfair to India. It is accused of being one of the largest carbon polluters. Simple arithmetic - there are lot of Indians in India . Per person they are one of the least polluting because they are generally poor and don't have gas guzzling cars or air conditioners.
Similarly , you must have memorised the stat that "China is the planet' s largest carbon emitter". Again, there are 1.4 Billion Chinese (about the same as the number of Indians). Now, per capita, Americans emit 15 tons per year which is double that of each Chinese. Note how we are not hearing this.
Exhibit Two
Nor have we heard about how the emissions in exported items such as phones and clothes tech remain on the balance sheet of the Chinas and Bangladeshes but bought and used by Londoners and New Yorkers .
According to a study by the Worldwide Fund for Nature WWF and University of Leeds , the true figure of British emissions would be 46 per cent higher if these embedded emissions were included . Western politicians are hiding these numbers just like Enron . It is deliberate .
The report says "Products including clothing , processed foods and electronics imported into the UK are counted as the manufacturing country 's emissions , not the UKs - although they would not have been produced were it not for UK demand . .. . these emissions account for 46 per cent of the UKs carbon footprint yet are not currently .. Included in the UK s net zero target "
This is the same for the US and Europe . Offshoring production also offshores carbon emissions . So China and India get the blame . . It is like merely blaming the poor coca producer in Colombia but not the rich American student snorting a line of coke . If there were no demand there would be no supply .
What this means is when the UK says it has reduced emissions from 1990 to 2016 by 41 per cent , it should be saying that this is only a 15 per cent reduction (once imports are factored in ) . On the flip side , the carbon numbers for the exporters go down in commensurate fashion and look better .
Exhibit Three
Since 1988 , one hundred multinational companies have been responsible for 71 per cent of all carbon emissions ... Many of those are promising the earth at Glasgow , and virtually carrying on business as usual . This is a case of the problem masquerading as the solution . It could be called carbon trading when done deceitfully .
Exhibit Four
If you want to go further back then since 1850 the US has emitted 510 billion tons from fossil fuels , deforestation , change in land use and cement . That is one fifth of the global total with a population today of less than 4 per cent. The figures in billions for China , India and UK are 280 , 80 and 70 respectively .
Well , they also like to limit the 'discussion' to the now and near future . They absolutely do not at to talk about the past or historical emissions before 1990. Now that is rather important because the reason we are in the jam is because of what Europe and the US has already uploaded onto the atmosphere.
We all know by now that we have to keep emissions low so that that the world does not heat up more than 1.5 degrees celsius since pre-industrial times . Another way of putting it is that the world has used up four fifths of its carbon allowance. The majority of that was used up by the West (and Japan)
Conclusion ? Seen through all these figures, the American Dream seems to sporting the dirtiest shirt in the room .
So what should be done and probably won't be?
The moral recommendation would be for America (starting with the uber rich) to go on a strict immediate carbon diet . Bread and water . But no . All American Presidents (except the last orange bufoon) prefer to regale you with how much they have done since 2005 . How they absolutely definitely will kill their emissions by 2030 .
The Chinese (and now it seems the Indian) High Command have accepted that their coastal cities on the Pacific and Indian Oceans will be un-inhabitable later this century unless things dramatically change. So Beijing came up with its targets of net zero emissions by 2060 (India is suddenly 2070) .
In your childhood did you ever read how the much of the 'Nether'lands were (and are) situated below sea level and how the clever Dutch built dykes, reclaiming land and survived for centuries ? They are hardly mentioned as climate victims . Bangladesh is. The reason in one sentence? The Dutch are rich and the Bengalis are poor . They can invest in the expensive intricate infrastructure and see out rising waters for several decades .
Logically , therefore , Bangladesh has
a ) to become developed and prosperous at high speed by industrialising , educating its people and genuinely going digital
b ) to demand that Western diplomats instruct that their governments pay up , in grants and not loans , for all the green energy and clean paraphernalia that is crucial for a growing economy to 'go green' .
Western diplomats might want to ease up on the advice (lectures) on adaptation . The main adaptation has to occur in the West where they have to cut back their consumption (and thus emissions ) . While the subcontinent grows , they go zero growth (or even as an Indian Minister suggested, go negative growth ). It is up to rich countries how they neuter the billionaire class and spread their economic benefits more equitably among their middle and working classes .
We know neither Europe nor North America is going to rescue the subcontinent over the climate.
If Dhaka wants to survive intact in the future, its destiny is to try and persuade a post-Modi Delhi to work with Beijing in coordinating an Asian security blueprint which puts the environment, technology and economic prosperity centre stage. (This means sayonara to the Quad).
Today, the Jubilee Debt Campaign says 34 of the poorest countries are paying 29 billion dollars in debt repayments every single year . That is five times more than these countries spend annually on projects trying to reduce the impact of the climate emergency. The same multilateral banks promising to funnel a hundred billion dollars a year to the entire South give with one hand and take with another. The debt needs to be cancelled.
Modi has tossed over a one trillion dollars invoice. One can agree with his sentiment but is it not just loose change? That amounts to merely fifteen months of the Pentagon's budget. The single biggest act an American President could do would be to slash his military budget and divert the excess to climate funding. The Pentagon is the institution with the largest carbon footprint of them all. It is going to be a long wait.
