In the current age of media, there’s a growing number of news channels and broadcasters pushing divisive narratives that aim to divide and obfuscate potentially important issues.
*collaborative post
Nowhere is this more evident than in the subject of climate change, where activists such as Insulate Britain and global conferences such as COP26 have seen their efforts continually (and some would argue fairly) undermined by accusations of climate hypocrisy and a failure to lead by example.
In this post, we’ll explore examples of so-called “climate hypocrisy”, while asking whether or not events such as COP26 generate more harm than good.
A Look at COP26 and Climate Hypocrisy
Much of the COP26 hypocrisy centred around US President Joe Biden’s trip to Glasgow, which is said to have created more than two million pounds of CO2 in potentially harmful emissions.
This comprised four private planes (including the famous and notoriously wasteful Air Force 1), an 85-car motorcade in Rome, and a 96-mile motorcade in Scotland.
Air Force One and the four large jets that typically accompany it generated an estimated 2.16 million pounds of carbon during the five-day trip to Europe, while the President’s extended motorcade featured vehicles with five-litre diesel engines produced around 8.75 pounds of carbon per mile travelled (which is around 10 times more than the annual car).
Of course, it’s easy to see the sheer hypocrisy in such actions, particularly at a time when the American President and a raft of global leaders are imposing restrictions on travel and the utilisation of diesel vehicles on roads.
It also seems to be at odds with the assertion from leaders that America and other developed nations lead by example, as creating such a seismic amount of CO2 can only cause environmental harm in the short term.
The Figures are Glaring – But is Climate Hypocrisy Real?
While there’s a great deal to dislike about such hypocrisy and the way in which it undermines the climate cause, it’s important to consider the crisis as a long-term issue that’s more of a marathon than a sprint.
More specifically, it will take decades of commitment and long-term action to resolve, and in this respect, world leaders are willing to travel and create temporary emissions in order to reach actionable accords and create tangible climate solutions.
For example, a £14 billion plan to completely end and reverse the process of deforestation by 2030 (which involves public and private funding and features more than 100 nations) could result in significantly reduced emissions and environmental harms if the terms are adhered to, creating a footprint that will more than offset President Biden’s motorcade.
With private companies and backers also prioritising their ESG strategy and supporting the introduction of more stringent rules, conferences such as COP26 can create a more collaborative environmental effort that drives more positive change in the long term.
This is an important consideration and one that must be kept in mind when we hear stories of so-called “climate hypocrisy” and use this to justify our own lack of effort over time.