tv Quadriga - Climate Change Who Pays to Save the Planet Deutsche Welle November 10, 2017 5:30am-6:01am CET
and. crime fighters the new season the radio crime thrillers begins. anything. domestic violence cyber crime and woman trafficking for investigative cases that will keep you on your toes crime fighting stories of the base idea ever so every young person needs to listen to crime frightens and shan't tell a friend tell a friend to fight crime fighters don't miss it. hello and welcome to quadriga can this year's un climate conference take meaningful action to put the paris agreement into place and to save nations like this one fiji is being and gulf by a steadily rising sea which makes its presidency of this year's climate conference
an all the more urgent mission it is the first small island nation to chair the conference which is taking place now here in germany the goals to build on the paris agreement by taking steps to limit carbon dioxide emissions and the activities that produce them activities such as mining and burning coal thousands of protesters say that has to end but at what price climate change who pays to save the planet that's the question we're posing today on quadriga and here are the guests we're going to answer and claudia kemp but she is the head of the energy transportation and environment department of the german institute for economic research she also serves as a member of the german advisory council on the environment which consults with the federal government and she says smart people don't waste time stuck in the past they invest in the growth markets of the future markets that will belong to those who. spot them first and it's
a pleasure to welcome my colleague christopher springing he is a political correspondent for g.w. t.v. and he is also covering the climate change conference in boston and he says pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is tantamount to sawing off the branch we're sitting on protecting our planet from climate change is a prerequisite for keeping jobs. and finally it's a pleasure to have multiple laming once again on the show he writes opinion columns on german and international issues for the target spiegel newspaper and he says climate protection goes must be given a stronger legal framework we also need a precise timetable for example on ending the use of coal fired power. i'd like to talk first of all about the prospects for this year's climate change conference which has this week gotten underway in the city of bun here in germany fiji's prime minister which as i mentioned is the president of this year's cop as
it's called he says his schools are to garner support for vulnerable island nations like his own and to build very concretely on the goals of the paris agreement focusing for the moment on the first of those aims can a conference like this one truly deliver meaningful help in time cloudy comfort yeah i would say so yes because as a working calm friends i would have all the paris agreement behind us and all the countries are still on board the u.s. still is in because i can only step out in three years from now so they really have to make it concrete who's paying and climate and the green bomb for example the clean technology bond was taken which saps and that's working seems a bit boring but it is important because we have to keep track and see where we where we end in the future because of a spring gave a skeptic might say you know what. we have been talking about this for years and
years and years and yet the projected level of temperature rise the projected level of sea level rise remains far too high. yes on the skeptics say you know why i have such huge conferences but the fact is it's a truly global challenge. and a truly global issue so it is something that all of the globe's nations have to agree on. and that i think the key thing to understand is that fighting climate change will only work if everybody's on board and that's why this conference is actually. far more important than it appears if you go back to two thousand and eight the conference of the parties the cop in that year failed to do the spadework ahead of the copenhagen summit in two thousand and nine which is why that summit failed so this. climate summit this year is doing the spade work for next year
because by next year the world is going to have to agree on rules of how to report their emissions cuts in a verifiable way in a comparable way in a way that everybody can trust and buy into which means essentially it comes down to this can the nations taking part actually deliver actions that to back up all of the nice aims and words that have been issued so far yes i agree i mean the impression that is given by the conference is we have one hundred ninety seven nations participating in the talking since one thousand nine hundred two then we have the coyote agreement five years later in the paris agreement and still the missions are going up so so what's the what's what the hell is going on with all these conferences but i think the conferences have a value in itself that shows that the whole word is fighting against something that is hard to comprehend that the way we produce any. gee this causing troubles like
tornadoes rising. sea levels and so on and so on and really affecting the lives of everybody on earth and i think is just right now we're talking about this for twenty five years but twenty five years to combine the whole world of this notion is is a success percy want to come back a little bit later to whether the whole world is really important but first of all dear viewers if you are lucky enough to live in a stable and temperate climate zone then you may still think of global warming as a future contingency but in fact it is a very distinct reality to the millions of people who are already being affected by sea level rise and by extreme weather events let's take a look. first hurricane harvey then hurricane erma plowed into the caribbean and the u.s. gulf coast killing a total of more than two hundred people. thousands lost their homes the total
damage estimate for both storms is about two hundred billion dollars. in south asia millions of people have been affected by severe monsoon rains and the floods this year have been the worst in decades and. east africa on the other hand has been hit hard by a drought and these conditions are lasting longer than they used to. europe has seen his share of extreme weather last month hurricane ophelia slammed into ireland and cyclamens obvious tore across northern europe germany was hit particularly hard . the u.n. predicts the twenty seventeen will be one of the warmest years since records began in the one nine hundred century. this is making life difficult in many developing countries who will pay the price for all this. but do they mean germany is as the world know is struggling with that one record
influx of refugees from twenty fifteen is migration part of what you might call the price that northern countries will increasingly be paying for global warming migration is a price but i think the one point two million refugees that are coming to germany since the fall of two thousand and fifteen most of them the overwhelming majority didn't come for climate reasons they come from war driven zones in syria afghanistan iraq from african nations the befalling apart eritrea is one of the big ones so i think right now it will it will grow so i think migration will grow as a problem in itself. good climate reasons as well but right now it is and can i just point out you know that there is a body of scientific opinion that. believes that the there was there was a terrible drought in syria in twenty eleven the country's worst ever drought
caused. a wave of refugees within that country and some studies indicate that that is what actually contributed considerably to the outbreak of civil war in syria and of course that civil war produced this huge wave of. migration to europe so i would strongly argue against that i mean the arab. uprising that started in tunisia then to egypt and spillover to syria i don't think the causes of all this is climate change there in that there might be such a list no proof yet so yes there may be some links but i don't see the real cause of the climate shift and one of the reasons that we have so many african migrants is simply because and that's one of the costs of climate change is. a drought kills farms kills jobs so they they they have nothing to lose to trek across
the sahara to risk their lives going across the mediterranean try and find work here that you can't fit you want to be a tie breaker on this issue because back then you think security conference has put climate agree i think on the agenda as a security risk not least because of migration now it's a huge security risk and it will be in the future it's clear that they scientific findings right now is not that proven right now but all the i.p.c.c. the scientific reports on migration on climate change is showing that migration will play a crucial role and especially europe is a fact a ts so we have to take this into account and be prepared and do everything we can to reduce climate change to mitigate emissions but also have the. regions who are most affected by climate change in africa for example and it's really time that the new nic security conference and all those other areas where they discuss about security international put the security it takes climate change on the agenda
because it's so important the geo political conflicts there and climate change is increasing those conflicts and this is why it's so important so let's talk about what can be done to mitigate the risk and to support those who need to adapt and as we saw in that film christopher spring that those who are already suffering worst from climate change effects are very often if not always those who did least to contribute to the causes do the paris agreement and institutions such as the green climate fund go far enough to remedy that asymmetry. well it depends who you're asking if you're asking western countries the industrialized world. most of the politicians representing those countries would say yes but if you asked people from poor nations from the developing world they take that's one of the things they criticize about the paris agreement. that it did not force the rich world
to make more serious financial commitments compensate three. commitments that's a very contentious word one of the issues that is likely to play a secondary perhaps but an important role this year's climate summit in bonn is the issue of loss and damage fiji is going to put that on the agenda. that moves us into. courts of law and there is in fact an increasing trend for people taking their own countries or other countries to law to court over the losses in the damages that they say they've suffered because of climate change at the moment the the causal relationship between kleis climate change and. these losses and damages is still quite difficult to prove that research there is so much research going on in climate science and what they call attribution of science is getting better and better and that it is very very important because because i think climate is not
the same as weather conditions so we cannot attribute it climate change to every sort of event we saw in all these pictures and tornadoes and the rising seal and all these things rising sea level yes but not tornadoes and other weather conditions so we need scientific if we can more if the climatologists can prove the link and the in the causal link between certain kind of producing emissions and weather events that will help a lot and i think the work the scientists are doing right now is very very important for this not least for legal battles if you could prove it and it started in the united states started. tobacco companies causing cancer so if we can prove this the same amount of cultural links on this level that would help a lot ok and what i have so reef response to that if you would and then i want to go see what i can show the scientific community is that the intensity of this weather event extreme weather events increases and this is already
a damaged reason why the damages are much higher but we have to see the economics behind this because when rich nations we have high damages like in the us with fraud and so on but the poor nations like africa the democrats are law and this is why it's so difficult from the economic perspective to get a right to get a right answer to this so you said in your opening statement that it's time to invest in the markets of the future but the fact is that many developing countries are going to find themselves putting scarce capital into adaptation into simply fortifying infrastructure to resettling displaced people who can no longer live in coastal areas again how can we best support them what are the best mechanisms instruments that are out there the first thing is that we have to reduce emissions and this is the best investment we can do into emission mitigation and we're living in a rich country we can invest and we should invest and we are doing investing into clean technologies such as electrical ability renewable energy energy saving
infrastructure which helps those regions as well we saw with the german policy to bring down the cost for renewable energy with the investment we did hear that it helps already developing countries china invest heavily into renewable energy already wind and solar in african country this is continuing as well so this is our job to bring down the costs of cleated and clean technology and then those countries have a chance nevertheless we are not fast enough and this is why this conference of the global conference is so disappointing and a certain point because emissions are still high and this is why it causes damages to those nations and this is why we have to. give money for this adaptation fund we would be more happy to have no adaptation because we can remove climate impacts but that's not what it's likely so we have to have to have investment into adaptation fund as well but priority is emission mitigation so let's look closer at that issue
of emission mitigation which of course is the central purpose of the paris climate agreement it was designed to be a kind of a hybrid between binding plans and voluntary action it sets out goals and plans but they were devised by the countries themselves and one breakthrough that made that agreement possible was agreement between the world's biggest c o two emitters namely the u.s. and china they both decided together to sign up now donald trump says that was a mistake. here's president trump signing an executive order painted dismantling key elements of the obama administration's effort to combat climate change gather we will create millions of good american. also so many energy. and really lead to believable prosperity all throughout our country. and a lot of americans were upset that the u.s.
pulled out of the paris climate agreement. can the agreement survive without the united states. christopher spring gate strangely enough the us has sent a delegation to boston can we be sure that its only function will be to resist because we've just seen the u.s. government a number of government agencies sign up to a report that says climate change is real it's drastic and it's manmade so the u.s. government seems to be speaking out of both sides of its mouth well this is one of the things that fascinating journalist much like myself at the the bomb climate summit how are the americans going to behave. they say they're going to represent us interests that can be anything interesting lead the u.s. delegation at these kinds of summits comes from the state department rex tillerson the secretary of state is thought to be. have
a different opinion about climate change compared to his boss president trump. the u.s. is still at the table still at the table until twenty twenty when the announcement to withdraw from the paris agreement actually comes into effect they all they've even been given one of the delegates has been given a leading role in one of the key negotiating panels. and i think the interesting thing is the u.s. has played such a positive role at many climate summit that this particular presidency this particular summit is trying to keep the u.s. on the board. people are perhaps nervous about how the u.s. is going to behave but they're also quietly confident i think if the u.s. delegates begin to push trumps cold policies for instance procope pro pro gas or all that kind of stuff that he's been talking about they will get angry very
quickly with the americans. that delegation is far smaller they haven't done a pretty climate briefing so we're all waiting to see how they're going to behave like a living this is of course. a central issue also in terms of keeping other countries on board and you said in your opening statement that we need clearer rules and real road maps going forward but can we hope to get that while everybody's watching to see whether the major emitter is still on board or not donald trump is not america that is that is good news i mean when i arrived in the u.s. as a correspondent december two thousand it was shortly before the supreme court made its verdict about gore versus bush if ago would have been president would have a climate fighting president on top of in the white house so i wouldn't call the grassroots level but on the level of the states for example california colorado other states and big cities you have something like a climate d. conference on this level it's fighting very very hard and doing
a very. jobs you have on the electronic level you know musk with this test the research and development level you have so many climate fighting technologies invented in the u.s. because the cuttle is author of a couple of decades ago so better than the usa so donald trump is not the usa and the infectious moment from his saying no to to paris has not been proven right because for example g twenty summit nineteen of the g twenty states were behind the person who human still and the last country except the united states was syria to sign the prose agreement which is now signing up so. that only does leave the us very isolated khoja kemp's that it's all about jobs of course donald trump has promised us called miners a comeback for coal so just give us the cost and benefits in terms of jobs you say in your opening statement promising green markets belong to those who spot them but
how many jobs does clean energy really create many of these technologies are decent to all their small scale are they really going to replace things like coal jobs sure they already did and this is a reality in the us you said it already correctly because the us i mean trump is not usa they have invested and they're still investing into renewable energy texas invest a lot into wind and solar there's increasing jobs in this area there's one million jobs in the solar energy alone which is ten times of those people working at the coal sector so that's their other facts which are relevant if trump wants to get the coal back it has to subsidize them heavily which increases the electricity prices i don't think that the americans will like that. because of what he's announcing and at the end we see he's announcing a lot but at the end there's not much happening so let's see and the emissions are going down in the us because of fracking gas which replaces call already and increasing renewables so the reality reality is much different of that what climate
is. a lot of the biggest that the second biggest missioner is china and the liners on board so i think this helps very much let me ask us to just open our focus a bit because there's one place where emissions haven't been going down and that's right here in germany this country is very proud of its energy event and the transformation of its energy system away from nuclear energy toward renewables but the fact is it's burning coal and the fact is apparently there are quite a few politicians here who subscribe to some of donald trump's arguments that how long to keep burning coal has become an issue in the country's coalition negotiations so i guess trump is not such an outlier after all well to me i would not compare him to the federal government and to a new america or the greens or the f.t.p. because all of them are on board in principle they don't deny that there is a manmade climate change happening and that has to be followed and that certain measures have to admit i don't think it is called lesley are different to what
donald trump says so i would say there is no comparison that makes that you are right germany has a lot to do more than it does of the moment and i think it was a mistake for example from the greens to say no we don't take two thousand and thirty as the time limit we take that out of negotiations with the with the new government i think that was a mistake from the greens we need to have certain timetables to force industry and to force all the participants to to to to to focus on a certain time when they have to change claudia kept another paradox in regard to germany's role it has seen some of its major car companies caught up in a scandal whereby they have fudged diesel emissions how can this country the host of the climate change conference ask other countries to sign up to stricter rules when it's own biggest most important corporations such it's a good question it's embarrassing for germany that's for sure the one thing is that
the coal sector. still very dominant. really had made a mistake and really reducing the renewable energy sector and also blocking the renewable energy sector and the gas fired power plants are standing still and coal fired power plants are producing emissions and the car companies are in a big scandal and immediately after that they should have to side it really to to change and the investment into the future is already happening you mentioned california and china they are investing into electric mobility so the germans are losing those markets and that's really bad mr springeth just coming back i'm sorry we're almost out of time so give us your comment tied together with the following if you would because your opening statement said that protecting the climate is a prerequisite for keeping jobs certainly that would appear to be true in the long term but we've got a short term problem here what would you say to all those politicians who say that
climate action d. stabilizes the entire political system by feeding populism by feeding right wing sentiment in so far as it destabilizes old industry i would say to them if you don't address climate change it's going to get worse you're going to have more chaos you're going to have more strife you're going to lose more jobs you're going to have conflict you're going to have catastrophic climate change. and there is a window of opportunity at the moment it's about ten years and the longer we wait the smaller that window is if you think of it as a graph we can transform our. economy from fossil fuels renewables at a nice pace at the moment to the more you wait the steeper that curve becomes and the more difficult it becomes so we have to stop now and it will save jobs thank you very much thanks to all of you for being with us here today and thanks to all of you out there for tuning in.
your tomatoes the supermarket. thanks. as we go about our daily lives june writes often the last thing on one minds. invisible hand is slavery in the twenty first century starting december second on d w. climate change is affecting us all. rising sea levels and erratic levels join the line through our streets. homes. and playgrounds. through entire community.
for. the good news is our own choices in energy conservation. recycling. and transport can help. find out what you can do today at redraw the lines. saudi arabia and kuwait have all of their citizens to leave lebanon amid political turmoil the essence is prime minister resigned the move comes amid a deepening crisis in the region with lebanon caught up in a conflict between saudi arabia and iran. u.s. president will try.