50/50 chance of climate survival

I went to a meeting yesterday that gave me a chance to listen to the experiences of some Pacific Islanders from Kiribati, the Torres Strait Islands and the Cartaret Islands. To be honest, it blew me away.

These people are already, right now, in big trouble. Not in 100 years time. Not un-named potential human beings in future. But real people, right now, today, literally on the front line of climate change.

And that front line is where land meets the sea. Even with the modest level of global warming we have experienced to date, the sea level is already rising. These people are losing land, and believe me they haven’t got much land to lose. They expressed anger and frustration at the pitiful lack of meaningful action.

And they are right to be angry and frustrated. Later on, a lovely guy I met from the Cook Islands called David who is on his government’s delegation told me of an official meeting he went to that included the aviation industry. He was gob-smacked by the fact that there is such strong (and currently successful) pressure to exclude aviation from emissions cuts in the next phase of the Kyoto deal. He told me that it was only in the 1990s that cartographers started remembering to put his homeland on world maps because it is so small. He reckoned if the aviation industry has their way, we might as well take the Cook Islands off again.

These people are already in trouble and face losing their entire country in the not too distant future. They are the most modest, generous, friendly people you could ever hope to meet and they talk of the need for international solidarity; for brotherhood; for the need to work together. And what do we get? We get the aviation industry and various others, along with their mates in government, busy negotiating loopholes and get-out clauses. What the hell are they doing? These people’s entire country is going under.

You can bet your arse that that if it was London or New York being inundated there would be some radical action from the politicians. By god if the square mile was under threat there would be some squealing from the bankers and financiers. Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling would be fighting with each other over who gets to ‘come to the rescue’.

But it’s not; it’s small islands somewhere in the Pacific that are steadily disappearing along with their vibrant cultures. Not key players in the global economy. Not movers and shakers on the international political stage. No, they’re more important than that. And here we are negotiating loopholes and get-out clauses for rich people. This is just shit. Sorry, but I can’t think of better description right now.

So here it is: the science says that with an 80 per cent cut in carbon emissions – the absolute upper limit that is even being considered here by the politicians – we have a 50/50 chance of keeping the rise in average global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius beyond pre-industrial levels. Think about that for a second. The absolute maximum effort many governments are prepared to make will give us a worse chance of success than if we were playing Russian roulette. That’s insane!

We would never accept those odds in other parts of our lives. Would you be prepared to play a normal game of roulette where you can choose red or black: if the ball lands on your chosen colour you get to carry on your life as normal, but get it wrong and you will be forced to move from your home in 10, 20 or 30 years time?

So, just to re-cap because this is important: an 80 per cent emissions cut = 50/50 odds on 2 degrees, and even 2 degrees = saying goodbye to some Pacific Islands. What can I say? We have to change our lives if there is to be any justice in the world. Do the maths.