Imlisanen Jamir
With the current weather patterns and their effects on human life, property and the environment, the grimmest predictions that were made on how the human species would deal with climate change and its effects seem to be coming true. The question was; would we embark on a massive shift in society, to use cheaper, cleaner sources of energy? Industries would be born and die. Life would change in a million small ways, some possibly quite difficult.
Doing so would improve national security and health. Doing so may allow continued access to water supplies, or their return. Doing so would benefit us in a million untold ways. Would we do it, or would we simply pollute ourselves to death, possibly exterminating all future generations and many other species besides? The prediction is that we would probably insist on trying both options.
We'd “try” shifting to cleaner energy, but only after billions have died, the cost of doing it has become unbearable, and the difficulty is potentially insurmountable, all in the midst of war, famine, and drought. These are predictions from years ago.
We'd already waited until change alone is no longer an option, and now there is a need to “invent something” to undo even more damage. People are already perishing from the indecision. The initial grim predictions on how humanity would respond to this dire crisis seem to be accurate. Then again, I suppose there could also have been the scenario where we not even tried.
It is true that on a global scale, vested interests often diverted public debate from ethical reflection by focusing on what appear to be “value-neutral” issues of cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment, and scientific uncertainty. The debate appears to revolve around “facts” and thus hides a host of dubious ethical assumptions. Aggravating the problem has also been the unwillingness to enforce strong policy decisions due to the complications that inevitable comes with current nation state politics.
The question unavoidably comes down to the matter of human and ethical response. Progress towards climate targets in light of the climate emergency necessitates wide-ranging, rapid policy action that presents both opportunities and risks. There is the risk, in particular, that without attention to ethical tensions and trade-offs, our actions will either exacerbate pre-existing injustices, entrench new ones, or miss opportunities to resolve them altogether. In this regard, the climate emergency is one of both emissions and ethics.
Comments can be sent to imlisanenjamir@gmail.com
