Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Given the current pace at which we are filling the atmosphere with carbon
to “meet the needs of the present”, one can hardly say that “the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs” is assured.
Views vary on the degree of our obligation to the future. Some recog-
nize no obligation to future generations, and in a literal sense there can
be none. Such attitudes effectively ask “what have future generations done
for me lately?” Nothing, of course. Yet generations unborn have a stake in
our decisions, and we have a moral obligation to safeguard that stake. The
Stern review on the economics of climate change implied that this obliga-
tion had no upper limit when it suggested that “we treat the the welfare
of future generations on a par with our own”. This stance implies that we
should imagine all future generations in a room with us, far outnumber-
ing the six billion of us, as we take today's climate action decisions. There
is nothing whatsoever wrong with us maintaining a keen regard to future
generations. This topic is firmly on the Stern review side of the spectrum
of views, but cautions that a sense of proportion is wise if our obligation
to the future is to ever win wide acceptance. The pressing issue is how to
distribute the costs and sacrifices involved in curbing carbon emissions
and in developing low-carbon energies.
Should the rich cut their emissions to let the
poor increase theirs?
On the demand side, the answer to the question above is yes. There are only
so many GHGs that we can safely put into the atmosphere, and the worst-
case scenario is that we have already reached that point. The industrialized
countries, which created the global warming problem with their industrial
revolution, need to give China, India and the developing world some head-
room for further development (which will almost inevitably involve fossil
fuels for the time being) towards Western levels. In order to provide this
headroom, the rich world needs to cut back on its own fossil-fuel use.
This is therefore a unique point in the planet's history. Never before
have all the countries of the world been effectively required to share out a
set limit of a finite resource (earth's carbon absorption). Never before have
richer industrialized countries had to consider accepting a levelling-down
towards poorer developing countries. Granted, richer countries currently
provide financial development aid to poorer countries, but they do so
in the context of their own growing economies and expanding national
budgets. Climate change makes things radically different. Climate stabil-
ity is a zero-sum game - and cutting overall emissions to get down to a
