At Belem, gateway to the Amazon, in Brazil, this week, world leaders, scientists, activists, negotiators, diplomats, indigenous peoples and other affected communities are gathering for the annual UN climate conference: COP 30. This is the thirtieth Conference of the Parties (hence COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It is the first climate summit being held after it has been established that notwithstanding the pledges at COP 21, the Paris Climate Summit, ten years ago, the 1.5-degree Celsius threshold above pre-industrial temperatures has been breached.
Where do we go from here?
The small Pacific island of Palau, part of an archipelago of some 340 islands, gives some indication as to what the future holds in store. Palau is home to 20,000 residents all of whom are likely to become climate refugees as a result of rising sea-levels, floods and intense storms of increasing frequency.
Another clear message comes from the village , in the Saint Pierre and Miquelon archipelago, two metres above sea level just off the Canadian coast, south of Newfoundland. The Saint Pierre and Miquelon archipelago is French overseas territory.
This village of Miquelon has been placed under a coastal risk-prevention plan, as it could soon disappear because of a rise in sea-level estimated to reach one metre by the end of the century. As a result, all new construction has been banned. Plans are now in hand to relocate the whole village at higher altitudes.
Palau and Miquelon are present day examples (two of many) which should lead us to query as to the potential impacts of a sea-level rise on the Maltese islands. Notwithstanding that, quite pompously, the Maltese Parliament has, some years back, recognized that Malta is facing a climate emergency, when push comes to shove, no one is apparently worried about the potential consequences. The intensification of coastal development as illustrated by the debate on the Villa Rosa proposed changes to local plans at St Julian's are indicative enough.
Listening to Minister Miriam Dalli, politically responsible for both the environment and climate change, the impression one gets is that ensuring that Malta is exempted from acting on specific issues is considered as being more important than addressing climate change and its impacts head-on. We have apparently yet to realise that while we can negotiate with the European Union, the climate does not negotiate. It imposes its will. Nature and natural forces do not discriminate in their impacts.
At Belém, Brazilian President Lula da Silva, addressing international leaders at a pre-summit gathering emphasised that the Earth cannot sustain humanity's dependence on fossil fuels. Without confronting this reality, the climate fight will be lost.
In Malta, though recognising that we are in the midst of a climate emergency we still encourage the use of fossil fuels through subsidies to petrol and diesel.
The false message being continuously communicated is that Malta can negotiate her way through the climate crisis. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our commitment to act in addressing the climate emergency should be reflected through the translation of words into concrete action.
Sooner or later nature will sweep through our land bulldozing through everything in sight, just as it has done elsewhere. When the time comes, however, we can be in a position to reduce climatic impacts if we act prudently and implement policies which reduce our environmental impacts.
Unfortunately, we still act as if tomorrow never comes.
An architect and civil engineer, the author is a former Chairperson of ADPD-The Green Party in Malta. [email protected] , http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com