Prospects of a dead planet

BANTAY GOBYERNO

Ike Señeres

Scientists are now saying that not unless we reverse the destruction of our environment, our planet could become uninhabitable by the end of this century. Most of us would not be around by then, but should we not care enough to save this planet for the sake of our children and the children of our children? For whatever it is worth, the European Union (EU) has already agreed to cut carbon emissions by half on or before 2030, based on today’s emission levels. It seems however that those cutting carbon emissions by half would not be enough, and we still face the prospects of a dead planet not unless the emission levels are fully placed under control as soon as possible. Meanwhile, the other countries that are the heavy producers of carbon emissions are avoiding the issue, citing reasons that it could mean the death of their industries.

This seems to be a no-brainer of a choice, it we have a choice at all. If we are given a choice between dead industries and a dead planet, which one would we choose? Perhaps those other countries are arguing that they could eventually cut their emissions later on but not now, but what if it is too late for the planet before they could do that? On their part, perhaps it would be too late for them to realize that if the planet will die, the market for their goods will disappear, and that means that their industries will also die. All told, what we need now is a good balance between people, planet and profits. Without this balance, the planet and even the people could die, and the companies that are going after the profits could also die.

Depending on whom you are and what you believe in, you could always find a reason to join the war against pollution, and you will not run out of reasons. If it is not your love for your family, it could be the love for your country. If it is not your love for your planet, it could be your love for your God, regardless of what your religion is. The Bible is full of passages exhorting us to protect and preserve God’s creation, and that is more than enough reason for us to join the war. Yes, it is indeed a war, and not unless we wage that war, many people will die, just like in a real war. As far as the Philippines is concerned, we may not face the threat of losing our country to the rising sea levels, but for sure, a big portion of our country will eventually be covered by water, while in some cases, entire countries will disappear, as in these countries will die, even if the planet as a whole will not yet die.

To put it in another way, it is the negative cycle of planetary destruction that could possibly cause the death of the planet. The cure to that negative cycle is none other than the positive cycle of planetary protection and preservation and if it has to be a cycle, it has to be complete. As we know it now, most of the local and the global efforts against planetary destruction are piecemeal, and are often not intertwined like a value chain, as it should be. One reason for this could be the separation of functions between and among government agencies, with no single government agency or council that is on top of all authorities. For example, there is supposed to be a Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), but it is not clear how the PCSD is supposed to be coordinating with the Climate Change Commission (CCC).

In the United States, several well meaning private groups have decided to create their own carbon credits exchange, without waiting for the American government to do it. That is actually a smart move on their part, because the American government has been dragging its feet in the issue of signing the Kyoto Protocol that would have created a global market for climate friendly carbon offsets. That would be a good idea for the local private sector to do, even if the Philippine government is more than ready to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Now that the full implementation of the Asean Economic Community (AEC) is just around the corner, perhaps our country could lead in proposing to cut down emissions in the region by 2030, beyond the targets that the EU has set.

Here is one example of how a positive cycle of planetary protection and preservation could work: if we plant more trees, the soil erosion will slow down, and the capacity of the soil to absorb more water will increase. Aside from that, the trees will absorb the carbon in the air, aside from producing oxygen that will counter the carbon in the air. If we plant more mangroves, the plankton will come back, and with the coming back of plankton, the fish will also come back. With more mangroves in our shores and with more plankton around them, the sea water could become cooler, and more marine life could thrive. It is important to note however that planting trees is not enough, because we need to take care of these trees instead of leaving them alone to die.

Here is another example: if we recover more recyclable materials from our solid wastes, lesser plastics will end up in our rivers, seas and oceans. If there are lesser plastics that will end up in these waters, the warming of the oceans will slow down and not only that, lesser fish will die from the pollution of these waters. The truth is, it is not just the hole in the ozone layer that is causing the global warming. It is also the pollution of the water that is causing the oceans to become warm. Not unless we stop the pollution of the waters, the oceans could die even before the planet itself could die. This could just be a matter of semantics, because it could even be the death of the oceans that could lead to the death of the planet.

This is not to say that one form of pollution is worse than the other, but it is actually the pollution of the air and the atmosphere that could possibly cause the death of the planet. It is the overproduction of carbon that is causing the worsening of the hole in the ozone layer that is in turn causing the global warming. We could say that energy gives us life, but what is ironic is that it is our hunger for energy that could cause the death of our planet. This is not yet a losing battle however, because there are now many alternative sources of energy that could be tapped, instead of just relying on fossil based fuels. Obviously, the only way to cut by half the level of carbon production is to also cut by half the level of fossil fuels consumption. There is no other way to do that, except to increase the production of renewable energy from sources such as wind and solar. Email bantaygobyerno- subscribe@yahoogroups.com or text +639369198429