Spot on! Climate change is the politician’s friend – they can reject it (Trump), ignore it, just mutter platitudes or even use it to favour vested interests – subsidies to grow biofuels to keep in with farmers. All because it’s a presumed and predicted largely ‘in the future’ issue rather than an in your face, incontrovertible one right here, right now such as plastic in the sea. When the key reason to stop the Amazon burning is not to save a phenomenally rich ecosystem from being wasted to make hardwood toilet seats or cheap beef when the world throws away of its food, but to cut carbon emissions then you know we now live with a pretty diminished, soul less ‘environmental’ movement.
I completely agree that the global decline in biodiversity is an issue that is scandalously under-appreciated in mainstream politics. We need to shake politicians, here and abroad out of their complacent attitude that this is somehow just an ‘and finally’ issue for the news bulletins and not really something worth their full attention.
Having said that I do not believe that this should be at the expense of displacing attention and concern away from climate change. These are two real and present concerns for the environment, both of which suffer from political lip service being substituted for genuine, effective action. Climate change is also one of the many things that threatens biodiversity in many parts of the World.
Of course, some responses to the threat of climate change are misguided and some are merely cynical attempts to seek commercial or political advantage from it but that does not mean we should not treat it as a problem of major importance. We have to differentiate between those responses that are genuinely helpful and those that are not and try to ensure that only the former are pursued.
There are various reasons to oppose the destruction of the Amazon rain-forest including the loss of biodiversity, the harm to its indigenous peoples and the release of huge amounts of carbon from one of the World’s great carbon sinks. I would hope that the policies of Bolsonaro and others that are leading to destruction of the forest, would be vigorously opposed on all of these grounds.
By the same token the annual heather-burning on our British grouse moors is of concern because of its potential impacts on biodiversity but also because of the resultant loss of carbon to the atmosphere when the burning occurs over peat as well as the impacts it has on water flows off the fells and the consequent flood risk down stream. I think it is appropriate for campaigners to call attention to all of these negative aspects rather than focusing on just one to the exclusion of the others.
Comments are closed.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRejectRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Spot on! Climate change is the politician’s friend – they can reject it (Trump), ignore it, just mutter platitudes or even use it to favour vested interests – subsidies to grow biofuels to keep in with farmers. All because it’s a presumed and predicted largely ‘in the future’ issue rather than an in your face, incontrovertible one right here, right now such as plastic in the sea. When the key reason to stop the Amazon burning is not to save a phenomenally rich ecosystem from being wasted to make hardwood toilet seats or cheap beef when the world throws away of its food, but to cut carbon emissions then you know we now live with a pretty diminished, soul less ‘environmental’ movement.
I completely agree that the global decline in biodiversity is an issue that is scandalously under-appreciated in mainstream politics. We need to shake politicians, here and abroad out of their complacent attitude that this is somehow just an ‘and finally’ issue for the news bulletins and not really something worth their full attention.
Having said that I do not believe that this should be at the expense of displacing attention and concern away from climate change. These are two real and present concerns for the environment, both of which suffer from political lip service being substituted for genuine, effective action. Climate change is also one of the many things that threatens biodiversity in many parts of the World.
Of course, some responses to the threat of climate change are misguided and some are merely cynical attempts to seek commercial or political advantage from it but that does not mean we should not treat it as a problem of major importance. We have to differentiate between those responses that are genuinely helpful and those that are not and try to ensure that only the former are pursued.
There are various reasons to oppose the destruction of the Amazon rain-forest including the loss of biodiversity, the harm to its indigenous peoples and the release of huge amounts of carbon from one of the World’s great carbon sinks. I would hope that the policies of Bolsonaro and others that are leading to destruction of the forest, would be vigorously opposed on all of these grounds.
By the same token the annual heather-burning on our British grouse moors is of concern because of its potential impacts on biodiversity but also because of the resultant loss of carbon to the atmosphere when the burning occurs over peat as well as the impacts it has on water flows off the fells and the consequent flood risk down stream. I think it is appropriate for campaigners to call attention to all of these negative aspects rather than focusing on just one to the exclusion of the others.