wild places | wild happenings | wild news
make a difference for our wild places

home | links | search the site
  all articles latest | past | articles by topics | search wildnews
wild news on wildsingapore
  New Paper 14 May 07
We're small and worried about your inaction
By Eugene Wee

Dear President Bush,

AS I write this letter on behalf of the people of Singapore, you have just returned from the small town of Greensburg, Kansas. You were there to survey the damage caused by a massive tornado that touched down last week.

There was much to see - the twister completely flattened almost every building in the town of 1,800 residents. You should have also put cities in northern Missouri on your itinerary. The state has already declared a state of emergency after heavy rains caused the Missouri river to overflow its banks, putting several towns under up to 1m of water.

Ironically, while many natural disasters like these have ravaged your country over the years, you seem reluctant to take steps to prevent more from happening.

The world's top scientists have already showed that global warming could lead to a rise in incidents of natural disasters like flood, drought, hurricanes, and tornadoes.

In 2001, you turned your back on the Kyoto Protocol - the international treaty that caps the amount of carbon dioxide that can be emitted from power plants and factories in two dozen countries.

Why are Singaporeans worried about your inaction? We are a small island, and if the oceans rise, we could end up underwater pretty quickly.

And we are already dependent on external sources for water. So if a drought hits, we would be in big trouble.

The US is currently the world's largest spewer of carbon-dioxide emissions, contributing over 25 per cent of the heat-trapping pollutants to the atmosphere. Yet, you have shrugged off blame for letting this go on, and even continue to question recommended methods for slowing down the trend.

You opposed Kyoto-style caps on emissions because you reckon they would hurt the US economy and cost American jobs. Your view that capping greenhouse gas emissions in the US will hurt the economy was debunked by a recent United Nations report.

A study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), showed that reducing carbon dioxide emissions will cost as little as 0.1 per cent of the world's annual gross domestic product and won't send the world economy into a tailspin.

In fact, not doing anything to stop the trend probably will.

American columnist Scott O'Reilly compared the situation to how the inhabitants of Easter Island were wiped out after they cut down all the trees on the island, causing an ecological disaster.

It's not as if your country does not have the resources to deal with this.

Just look at the great state of California. The state government, led by former Hollywood star Arnold Schwarzenegger, put itself at the forefront of the war against global warming by establishing caps on greenhouse gases, developing alternative fuels and energy sources, and embarking on forestry programmes to cut emissions by 25 per cent by 2020.

A 2005 survey of cities participating in the IPCC's Cities for Climate Protection programme found that the US saves about US$535 million ($811m) annually and reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 23 million tonnes through local climate action.

Can you imagine the cost savings for the whole country if your administration took the same actions at a federal level?

To your credit, you have begun to acknowledge the severity of the situation and have expressed support for a new plan by Japan to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

But it might already be too late by then, for both our countries.

So as you ponder over your visit to Greensburg, consider giving the Kyoto Protocol another look.

You don't need another flood, hurricane or drought as a reminder.
links

Related articles on climate change
about the site | email ria
  News articles are reproduced for non-profit educational purposes.
 

website©ria tan 2003 www.wildsingapore.com