IN response to the mounting risks posed by global warming, the lower but more powerful chamber of the Japanese Parliament voted last month to declare a climate emergency. The declaration followed the announcement by the new Prime Minister, Yoshihide Suga, that Japan shall be a “net zero emitter” of greenhouse gas (GHG) by 2050. This means Japan, a major importer of fossil fuel, shall undertake a bold and massive phasing out of coal and gas plants.
These “dirty” coal and gas plants are blamed worldwide as the leading emitters of GHGs, the gases that trap the sun’s heat and cause what the scientists call as “global warming.” In turn, global warming is the reason why the world has been experiencing extreme weather phenomena such as the El Niño/La Niña climate pendulum, from a season of prolonged drought to one of destructive typhoons. The life-threatening “risks” associated with GHG-triggered climate changes are now well documented: floods, forest fires, sea rise, disruptions of ecosystems and biodiversity, etc. These climate-change “risks” eventually affect homes, lives, livelihoods, air quality, water supply, health system, human security, economic growth and development of every country in the world.
Both developed and developing countries are affected by global warming, alternatively dubbed as climate change. Like Covid-19, global warming is a global problem that cannot be stopped, much less reversed, if there is no unified cooperation and support from all countries of the world. The biggest responsibility is reposed on the big GHG emitters, the rich developed countries (Europe, North America, Japan) and now, China. They have accumulated over 70 percent of the GHGs emitted since the start of the industrial era. In short, they owe the world a high “carbon debt.” This is the reason behind the demand of governments and civil society organizations from developing countries for “climate justice.” In the Philippines, over 100 people’s and civil society organizations have formed the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ).
But the battle to stop global warming requires serious commitment from all countries to stop or minimize any further heating of the world by curbing their respective national GHG emissions. In 2015, the global community of nations, after prolonged and exhausting negotiations, came to a “consensus” in Paris to keep global temperature rise to within 1.5 to 2.0 degrees Celsius of pre-industrial level. Scientists of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warn that a rise beyond 2.0 degrees will be catastrophic to human life in the world.
Unfortunately, not all leaders are believers in climate change. The outgoing American president, Donald Trump, withdrew from the Paris Agreement in 2017, arguing that the said Agreement is unfair to American businesses and workers. The United States happens to be the world’s leading GHG emitter and has the highest carbon debt.
Fortunately, more and more countries are seeing the logic behind the IPCC’s recommendation. Close to 200 countries have signed on to the Paris Agreement. Japan’s resolution on climate emergency had been adopted much earlier by Britain, Canada, France and the whole European Union as a bloc. There are also around 2,000 regional and city authorities around the world, including American cities opposed to Trump, which voted for the Paris Agreement.
In the case of the Philippines, President Duterte initially expressed opposition to the Paris Agreement in 2016. Then, he reversed himself by signing on to the Agreement the following year. In his recent speech in the Asean Summit early this month, President Duterte even sounded like a CSO activist when he asked for climate justice for the Philippines and other developing countries that have been experiencing climate change-related disasters.
The trouble, however, is that the government has not been fully transparent on the “Nationally Determined Commitments” it has submitted under the Paris Agreement. Together with the late Senator Heherson “Sonny” Alvarez, the PMCJ asked for a dialogue in 2019 with the Climate Change Commission regarding the details of the Philippine NDC and the status of their implementation. None of the CCC commissioners showed up in the dialogue. The CCC only sent some technical staff, who briefed Senator Alvarez and PMCJ on climate funding possibilities for the Philippines.
Nevertheless, the Climate Action Tracker of Berlin rated (as of December 2019) the Philippines’s NDC commitments—summarized as 70 percent reduction in the GHG emissions of the country’s industrial, energy and agricultural sectors by 2030—to be below the “business as usual [BAU] levels.” In the CAT’s rating system, this makes the Philippines’s NDC compatible with the Paris Agreement of keeping the rise in global temperature below 2.0 degrees.
The official policy pronouncement of President Duterte on renewables somehow supports the above rating. In July 2019, he declared to “fast-track the development of renewable energy sources and to reduce dependence on traditional energy sources such as coal.” Also in April 2019, he signed into law the Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EE&C) Act, which seeks to improve energy use in the country, aiming to reduce overall demand by 24 percent below BAU by 2040.
And yet, CAT noted that the Philippine energy policy related to coal plants is at variance from the country’s GHG-reduction goals. CAT wrote:
“…Current policies are not yet on track to meet the NDC target with one of the key issues being the projected growth of coal. In 2015, the Philippines had around 12 GW of coal-fired power capacity under construction or in the pipeline. Since then it has built around 3.2 GW, with another 14.6 GW on the way, triggering concerns over the potential creation of stranded coal assets worth billions.”
In short, energy investments have been flowing in the wrong direction toward coal. CAT also observed that the Philippines has not given a clear definition of the country’s “BAU pathway,” which makes measurement of emission levels uncertain. CAT added: “Nor does it quantify future land use emissions, adding to the lack of transparency.” These are the reasons why CAT classified Philippines’s NDC as “2.0 degree compatible” instead of the ideal “1.5 degree compatible.”
The truth is that there are very little indications that the Philippines is seriously working to fulfill its commitments under its NDC to the Paris Agreement. As pointed out, the CCC failed to meet Senator Alvarez and PMCJ on this issue. There is hardly any public discussion on the NDC, Paris Agreement and the importance of declaring a climate emergency. No Senate hearing, no House hearing.
On the GHG issue, the coal- and gas-fired plants are still the dominant sources of energy for the country despite the plummeting prices of renewables worldwide. Yes, there is a recent announcement by the Department of Energy to stop issuing permits for the building of new coal plants. But there is no announcement on the phasing out of existing coal plants, as what some countries have done. No announcement halting financing for coal plants, as what Malaysia’s Central Bank governor did.
On climate change adaptation, the series of typhoons this year, culminating in the arrival of Rolly and Ulysses, has bared the sad reality: Philippine forests continue to shrink and prevent/reduce flooding in the low-lying areas. This despite the announcement by the previous Aquino administration that it was planting 1.5 billion trees under the National Greening Program. This despite the “enhanced NGP” involving over 7 million hectares, as outlined in the PDP 2017-2022.
In summary, it’s business as usual. Concerned officials keep mouthing rhetorics against climate change and yet are unable to report anything substantial on the country’s contribution to the global battle against this climate change pandemic and the country’s readiness against the risks associated with global warming.
Image credits: AP/Aaron Favila