Opinion

When it comes to tackling global warming, individual actions do not go far enough

Rite & Reason: Slavery was abolished as it is inherently wrong and the same must happen with carbon emissions

Cars stranded on a flooded highway in Dubai following the heaviest rain on record. Photograph: Giuseppe Cacace/Getty Images

Peter McGarry
Sun Apr 21 2024 - 05:30

Stephen Omukoko Okoth, a young man from western Kenya, distinguished himself as the only student from his school to secure an educational stint in Switzerland.

This opportunity paved the way for him to win a scholarship to Oberlin College in Ohio, USA. Now he is interning on Wall Street. Alongside his academic pursuits, Okoth volunteered as a mentor for young participants of The Earth Prize, an environmental competition I initiated three years ago. His commitment earned him the title of Mentor of the Year. His insights were particularly poignant during an interview on the Unpolluted podcast, where he shared his reasons for studying economics in college. His professor used the analogy of a single water molecule, explaining that predicting its movement is nearly impossible. However, if you pour out a bucket of water, you can reliably predict the general direction in which the water will flow.

Similarly, while economics may struggle to forecast the behaviour of an individual, it can effectively predict overall economic trends. This comparison between a molecule and a bucket came to mind recently when I faced scepticism about climate change.

Closer to home, Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary presents an interesting case. Given his dual roles as a cattle farmer and boss of the largest airline by market capitalisation

The first instance occurred while I was dining with a Thai industrialist in Bangkok. During the meal, our conversation veered towards my environmental interests, prompting him to disclose his climate change scepticism. He said that, despite widespread concern about carbon dioxide levels, they still only constituted a minor fraction of the atmosphere. His comment took me aback and, regretfully, didn’t challenge it, given that he was hosting me.

READ MORE

Technically, he was right: the latest data showed CO2 concentrations at 427 parts per million (ppm), recorded on the Pacific island of Mauna Loa. This figure is a significant rise from the pre-industrial average of 280ppm over the last 10,000 years. In my host’s view, the increase to 427ppm seemed negligible, especially considering that CO2 levels were much higher millions of years ago.

Closer to home, Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary presents an interesting case. Given his dual roles as a cattle farmer and boss of the largest airline by market capitalisation, it is perhaps not a surprise that he previously expressed scepticism about the reliability of climate science, echoing a common critique about their models’ ability to predict climate phenomena accurately. He has since changed his views, though he is still frustrated by the focus on emissions via flying.

This reminds me of Okoth’s story about the water molecule: critics use the complexity of modelling individual climate elements as a straw man argument against climate science.

To effectively address climate change, we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which could be facilitated by imposing heavy taxes on jet fuel and methane production

However, I view climate modelling more like predicting the outcome of a bucket of water being thrown: while the specifics may be uncertain, the general result — a wet floor — is inevitable.

I admire O’Leary and the aforementioned Thai industrialist as well as Irish farmers in general. As a capitalist, I share their frustration with the well-intentioned but sometimes cumbersome regulations imposed by Green politicians. To effectively address climate change, we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which could be facilitated by imposing heavy taxes on jet fuel and methane production. Higher jet fuel costs could benefit a well-managed airline like Ryanair, potentially reinforcing its leadership position within Europe. This might also result in fewer people flying, a natural outcome under capitalist principles where the tax on jet fuel essentially prices in its negative external effects. We might not be able to model the impact of carbon emissions from planes precisely, but the science predicts the broader impact: rising temperatures.

We shouldn’t be misled by the inability to model every specific detail; the overarching science is clear

Similarly, a methane tax could lead to smaller livestock herds in southern Europe, where drier conditions make it hard to compete with the lush pastures of Ireland. Implementing carbon taxes across Europe uniformly, including on imports from outside the European Union, could ironically play to Irish strengths.

Our current approach places the burden of responsibility on individuals — imagine if, during the slavery era, it was suggested that our 19th-century ancestors wear less cotton or consume less sugar because they were products of slave labour. Slavery was ultimately abolished because it was inherently wrong. Similarly, emitting carbon and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is an action that must be taxed and ultimately curtailed. We shouldn’t be misled by the inability to model every specific detail; the overarching science is clear. Just as pouring a bucket of water inevitably results in a wet floor, emitting carbon into the atmosphere will undoubtedly create a deteriorating environment for us all.

  • Peter McGarry founded The Earth Foundation to accelerate positive change toward environmental sustainability. To learn more about The Earth Prize, or attend the virtual awards ceremony on Earth Day, April 22nd, please visit theearthprize.org.
  • Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
  • Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
  • Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
LATEST STORIES