The most comprehensive review ever carried out on the impact and cost of climate change was published on Oct. 30. Since then, Sir Nicholas Stern, the author of the report, has been carrying his message to a number of world capitals, including to Tokyo, where he addressed an audience that included Taiwanese representatives invited by the British office. In his report, Stern showed that all countries will be affected by climate change. Taiwan is no exception.
Since 1900 global sea levels have risen by 10cm to 20cm. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported that by the end of this century, sea levels could rise by a further 90cm and temperatures by a further 5?C to 6?C. The Environmental Protection Administration has calculated that a rise in sea level of this size would permanently flood more than 200km2 of land in Taiwan, with consequences for population displacement and both agricultural and industrial output.
Taiwanese may feel that there is little they can do to tackle this and that the real problem lies elsewhere. But each Taiwanese generates 10 tonnes of carbon every year, more than the inhabitants of Germany, Japan or the UK. Taiwan contributes 1 percent of the world's total annual emissions of carbon for less than 0.4 percent of its population.
So Taiwan and the Taiwanese can make a difference. But there are powerful voices in this country arguing that it would be too damaging to the economy to try to reduce emissions significantly and that the nation badly needs new investment in manufacturing to prevent loss of jobs to China.
Experience in the UK shows that this need not be the case.
Since 1990 the UK has cut its greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 15 percent. In response to the Stern report, the government has announced legislation to ensure a 60 percent reduction by 2050. But in the period from 1990 the UK economy has also grown 35 percent -- the longest ever period of sustained growth -- with more people in employment than ever before. The government estimates that achieving the 60 percent target will put back overall economic growth in the same period by six months at most.
In fact, the targets are creating new jobs and new opportunities. Between 2001 and 2004, 230,000 new jobs and 10,000 new companies were created in the environment market and the sector now employs 2 million people throughout Europe.
Companies that have taken a lead in reducing emissions have also gained. In just two years, BP, one of the world's biggest energy companies, reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent, making US$635 million of efficiency savings by doing so. IBM managed to reduce its emissions by more than 60 percent -- more than half of this through straightforward energy conservation measures.
The UK's experience shows that reducing carbon emissions is a "win-win" outcome -- companies can reduce their costs, increase their bottom line, while the environment benefits, too.
China is now also taking action to tackle emissions. Its ministers already recognize that China's reliance on coal for power is one of the greatest threats to the global climate. They are taking active steps to address this, so companies investing in China should not assume they will find emission control regulations there to be less rigorous.
In fact, Stern's research and analysis show that tackling climate change is the pro-growth strategy; ignoring it will ultimately undermine economic growth. The companies which will prosper will be those that prepare and adapt for it now, not those which try to delay changing as long as possible.
Dynamic companies are doing just that. Two of the world's biggest energy companies -- BP and Shell -- are investing heavily in Europe, the US and China in renewable energy projects and see considerable potential for similar projects in Taiwan. A Taiwanese company won the top prize in this year's Deloitte 500 Awards, a prestigious event to recognize the fastest-growing companies in Asia. Its product? High efficiency solar cells for renewable energy.
But for more companies to follow suit and for action to tackle climate change to be truly effective, governments must set in place the right policy framework. Taiwan's government has already taken the first steps toward this with the renewable energy development and greenhouse gas reduction bills, both of which now await further cross-party negotiation in the Legislative Yuan.
Early agreement of both bills would allow more Taiwanese companies to plan ahead with confidence and would enable Taiwan to show international leadership in an important area. The bills would also encourage Taiwan to diversify its energy supply and thereby improve its energy security.
However, passing these bills would only be the first step to sustained action. Although the administration already considers the carbon impact of major new developments in environmental impact assessments, no targets have been set for these.
Experience from Europe and elsewhere increasingly shows that clear targets are essential if greenhouse gases are to be reduced. Setting targets would not prevent new development. The UK continues to invest in energy-intensive industries.
But clear targets would encourage better decision-making and more profitable projects in the long term. Setting targets would show a real commitment to reducing greenhouse gases, send a clear signal to business and to the community and demonstrate to the wider world Taiwan's resolve to tackle climate change.
Stern's report paints a stark picture of what could happen to the world if effective steps to tackle climate change are not taken soon. But he ends his report on an optimistic note: "There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we act now and act internationally. Governments, businesses and individuals all need to work together to respond to the challenge. Strong, deliberate policy choices by governments are essential to motivate change."
Tackling climate change is not only necessary; it makes good business sense. Taiwan's leaders have a real opportunity to lead the way in this.
Michael Reilly is the director of British Trade and Cultural Office in Taipei.
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The National Immigration Agency on Tuesday said it had notified some naturalized citizens from China that they still had to renounce their People’s Republic of China (PRC) citizenship. They must provide proof that they have canceled their household registration in China within three months of the receipt of the notice. If they do not, the agency said it would cancel their household registration in Taiwan. Chinese are required to give up their PRC citizenship and household registration to become Republic of China (ROC) nationals, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said. He was referring to Article 9-1 of the Act
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS