Killing the Climate Myths
Copenhagen Climate Council
Copenhagen can actually deliver a significant result for the benefit of future generations, but business leaders and governments must think beyond the climate myths argue Danish Minister of Climate and Energy Connie Hedegaard and Erik Rasmussen, founder of the Copenhagen Climate Council.*
Ten years ago, many people thought that there was no climate problem. They were – unfortunately – wrong.
Five years ago, many people thought that we didn't have the ideas and technologies to lower emissions dramatically. Wrong again. Through innovation, we are capable of making electric cars, insulate houses, and tap clean energy from the sun and wind to hit the right low-carbon path. It is not easy, but it is possible, given the right framework and collaboration between policy and business.
In the last three years, even the economic excuse – that it is too costly to shift from fossil fuels to low-carbon solutions – has been eradicated. A series of studies clearly show that low-carbon growth is not only good for the planet, but it is also the most logical long-term way out of the economic crisis. Huge opportunities await in new, green markets. It is no coincidence that the two most energy-efficient countries in the world – Denmark and Japan – are competitive and wealthy.
Preventing dangerous climate changes probably costs us around 1% of global GDP per year in the next decade or so. It's less than what we spend on subsidizing fossil fuels. It is affordable.
Now, it is time to kill the two last myths. 1) That business isn't willing to contribute and 2) that we don't have the decision-making system to reach a new global climate change treaty.
It is up to business itself to kill the first myth. Over the last 2 to 3 years, we have seen business groups and individual corporations become more and more outspoken when it comes to environmental regulation. A large group of frontrunner companies, some of them the world's largest businesses, have realized that ambitious, long-term global laws to prevent climate change is good for the bottom line. It creates certainty, lower energy costs and resource security.
This week, hundreds of CEOs and board members will meet in Copenhagen to provide input for the climate negotiations leading up to the U.N. Climate Change Conference, also taking place in Copenhagen later this year. The World Business Summit on Climate Change is a unique opportunity for business to demonstrate their true commitment. That they are willing to go beyond soft-spoken corporate social responsibility jargon and actually support a new, ambitious climate deal that puts a price on pollution. The Danish government will take the input to the negotiating table, because mobilizing the innovation power in corporations is crucial to reach an effective agreement.
The second myth is a shared responsibility. We often say that the U.N. climate negotiations are too little, too late, and too slow. The reality is, however, that they are as good as we want them to be.
The U.N. process is there, it includes 192 countries, and since 2007 they have shared a vision of a world that controls climate change. We even have a detailed roadmap leading to a decision in Copenhagen in December this year.
If all the critical players show dedication, pragmatism, and true political leadership it will work.
This is a historic opportunity and something to be cherished, not bashed. The real danger is that if we keep saying that the process isn't good enough it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If we instead show leadership and pragmatism, Copenhagen can actually deliver a significant result for the benefit of future generations. But for business leaders and governments, it requires thinking beyond the myths.
Connie Hedegaard is the Danish Minister of Climate and Energy; Erik Rasmussen is the Founder of the Copenhagen Climate Council and CEO of Monday Morning.
*Editor's Note: This commentary first appeared in the Danish-language daily Berlingske Tidende.
Key Websites & Blogs
Key Media Sources
Key Policy Documents
Key Climate Agencies
Key International Organizations
Key NGOs
Key Science Reports
Key Business Networks
Key Research Centers
Key Clean-tech Companies
Comments feedThank you for your articulate opinion.
I think that we should refrain from using the “too good to be true” language we read in UN reports when discussing environmental issues. It is not simple to create a unified environment friendly view in a world that breaths politics and struggle for dominance and supremacy.
How can you explain climate change and its dreadful impacts to a boy who has not eaten for days, to an old man who sleeps on the streets, or to a family that lives in one of the hottest war spots?! Developing countries fall way behind.
Developed countries should take preparing and financing developing countries on its shoulders, simply because we all breathe the same air, eat same food, and step on the same planet.
We stand on a crossroad; either we march hand in hand towards a sustained environment or we draw the finish line to the race of life on the planet.
The decision is ours…
Too many politicians have already awaited credits for the results from the meeting.
Our countries have been pumping out pollution. Even those who live outside of cities create too much pollution. We are evolving now.
Even if this were to be part of the groups of individuals looking to congeal this world-order agenda, everything works for a good purpose in the end. we will come together and evolve either through ignorance and pain, or through grace and awareness.
Either way, we are evolving into something new and more ideal. We'll make it.
Mr. Earl, if you claim your calculations are so accurate, why on earth weren't such changes noticed before? If the climate change promoters are frauds, what should we call the escapist developed nations who refuse to take historical responsibilities? If you dare,see the conditions of poor farmers in the poor countries. While the US has above 700 vehicles per 1,000, India has 12 and Bangladesh 4. Plus, calculations will also show you that the poor countries will face it more.
I wish to state that I have not heard such a "con job" since the Y2K bug. There is NOTHING mankind can do for climate change except STOP REPRODUCING. And for sure and certain, no TAX is going to change a thing. Kevin Rudd does not have my vote, my confidence, and certainly not my respect. He does not speak for me, and I'd be very surprised if he spoke for many Australians, apart from primary school kids who know no better!
I request the politicians at Copenhagen to at least help the wind energy companies like Vestas, RePower,Hansen, Suzlon. Such action by itself shall be a great service to green process for the entire world.
Whatever be the outcome at the Copenhagen climate talks it is very important to financially help the wind companies like RePower, Hansen, Suzlon, Vestas etc. Otherwise these wind companies will fall financially since they are not getting enough turbine orders in the absence of climate deal. And the fall of the wind companies will be a major blow to the climate change green peocess.
Yeah sure. the climate isn't changing at all... or if it is, it's not our fault, so lets just keep on using dirty energy and deplete our world resources. When we're done wasting it all we'll see... it will be too late to change things then without a major world recession, but what the heck at least our generation benefited from all that $ in the short term. YAY
Is it really Global Warming or Global Business?
Gentle Readers,
If you go to this url
http://www.biomind.de/nogreenhouse/daten/EE%2018-2_Beck.pdf
you will find data from over 400 study's,
with 200,000 distinct samples, showing
that CO2 levels have remained between
300 - 350 ppm since 1810.
No change in atmospheric CO2 concentrations
in 200 years.
Kindest Regards to all,
I am,
John Lepant
Brighton
Colorado