Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1096093
16 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 24 MARCH 2019 INTERVIEW Recent examples of extreme (and also unusual) weather seem to have reinforced the message that global warming is: a, an undeniable reality, despite climate change scepticism and; b, a threat that may conceivably wipe us all out. But… how much truth is there to that? Was the recent gale, with its 100+kph winds, really a symptom of climate change in action? First of all, the phenomenon is more a case of 'Global warming and climate change are used as interchangeable terms, yet they do not have the same meaning'. Global warming does not imply that climate everywhere around the globe will become uniformly warmer, but that the tempera- ture of the Earth's atmosphere is rising. This rise in temperature is what causes climate change, which manifests itself in melt- ing glaciers, shifts in harvesting seasons, and changes in long term weather patterns. I'm not a climatologist, and it's not easy to explain the full complexity of climate patterns in an inter- view. But weather is just what you experience on the day. It can vary quite drastically. Cli- mate is measured over longer periods of time. To acquire ac- curate data on climate requires decades of research. Any change to the climate is going to affect weather patterns; but the effect is not obvious. Just because aver- age temperatures are on the in- crease, it doesn't follow that the weather, on any particular day, will get warmer. It could do the opposite, quite frankly. There are too many factors to go into, but just to mention one: ocean cur- rents. Extreme weather, in parts of the world, is affected by warm current streams encountering colder temperatures… so global warming can and does cause ex- treme weather… Fair enough, but it doesn't follow that all extreme weather is caused by global warming. Let's face it, we've always had violent storms in winter before… Yes, undeniably. Storms do happen, and there were extreme gales in the past that we still talk about today… like the October 1982 storm, in which four people died… … not to mention St Paul's shipwreck in AD60… [Nodding]… and there were even storms that caused a lot of damage in the time of the Knights. One famous storm caused a lot of damage even in the Grand Harbour, costing the Knights around half their fleet. It was before the breakwater ex- isted, naturally… but still it must have been pretty extreme. So storms do happen, and have al- ways happened. What stands out today, however, is not just the severity of individual storms… but their frequency. It is increas- ing. Weather patterns are also changing: especially in terms of rainfall. Malta, for instance, is experiencing extremes in rain- fall: either drought, like we faced during the last few winters… or heavy downpours causing flash- floods. Our climate is becoming more arid; more 'desert-like'. Our rainfall patterns are just like those of a desert. Very little an- nual precipitation; but when it rains, it literally pours. This is incidentally causing a lot of con- cern in Malta's agricultural sec- tor. Bee-keepers, for instance, are particularly concerned. So while we can't talk of individual storms as examples of climate change… the increased frequency does in- dicate a pattern. It all points in a very clear direction. The scien- tific consensus is that, unfortu- nately, we really have reached the 'do-or-die' stage… That indeed is the consensus of the scientific community. But as we all know, climate change scepticism remains rife… and there are also enormous vested interests in resisting measures to reduce emissions, etc. In a nutshell, our entire economic model – basically, consumerism – seems to be geared up to perpetuate the problem. Yet when it comes to proposing solutions, the suggestions always seem to translate into a burden to be borne by the individual consumer: i.e, the end-person buying the product or using the service… not the system itself. Is that an accurate assessment, first of all? I would say that capitalism was the system that brought a lot of problems to nature and the envi- ronment; and climate change is only one of them. To be honest, I don't think that the same system will ever be the one to solve this problem. It is built in such a way that 'economic growth' eclipses all other concerns. That ap- proach will not get us anywhere, quite frankly. So, I do think that alternative systems [to capital- ism] need to be explored. But I'll come back to this later. The oth- er part of your question touches on a myth that I think needs to be exploded. There is this per- ception that in a consumerist society, the consumer can solve the problem by simply consum- ing less, or consuming different products. But it's a myth. A myth that was built into the same sys- tem, actually. Because basically, the only ones who can bring about the change are the own- ers of the means of production. Now: this doesn't mean that the consumer can't make any differ- ence at all. We do support alter- native, eco-friendly products; in fact, we support small scale ini- tiatives which supply, Fairtrade, plastic-free and organic goods, and so on. We have to be careful, however, not to buy into the per- ception that initiatives such as this, on their own, can somehow 'solve' climate change. Obvious- ly, if you can avoid using plastic, please do so. It does help. But on its own, without any change to the system that brought about the problem, it is not going to be effective… But if the world's global mega-corporations are (or feel) unaffected by the threat… if the oil industry continues to generate billions in profit, and pays lobbyists to counter scientific advice on climate change with propaganda… what impetus do they have to change their own work practices? Well, there are two sides even to the capitalist model. Some global industries are uncon- cerned – for now – but that is beginning to change. Certain sectors are beginning to worry about their future profitability. Agriculture, for instance… and I mean the international giants of the food industry, not just the small-scale, artisanal sector… and especially insurance. These sectors know they will suffer. They are now very worried, actu- ally. But then, on the other side, the oil producing companies re- main very sceptical. And they are now also distracting from the is- sue, by diversifying into 'renewa- bles'. To be honest, the global media has also played a part in this: they did not do a great job of projecting the scientific princi- ple of evidence-based research. It was more like: 'Here's the expert, and here's the climate change sceptic'. In other areas, this sort of 'balanced' approach might even work. But not with scien- tific issues. There is a difference between a scientific observation, and a personal opinion… And yet, 'capitalism' also hinges on the principle of 'demand and supply'. There is an argument that, if the demand for harmful products does drop, as a result of greater awareness, etc… so will the supply. An example of local relevance might be Prospects do not look good in the global battle against climate change. But environmentalist and Friends of the earth director MARTIN GALEA DeGIOVANNI argues that youth activism represents the last bastion of hope, in a scenario that offers only gloom Hope lies in the younger Raphael Vassallo Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt