Place yourself in 2100, imagine at what degree would your thermometer strike during the normal summer days? If you happen to picture the worst, then you should feel relieved –at the very least— over the fact that leaders from all over the world are currently trying to limit raise in global temperature by 2° Celsius in 2100.
From November 30 to December 11, 38,000 delegates representing 160 countries of the world, parties, and organizations gathered in Paris, negotiating and debating relentlessly on their last chance in enforcing a strong, resilient, and firm global regulations that would curb the ever-increasing effect of climate change to our everyday life. All this took place in COP 21.
To its nature, COP that stands for “Conference of Parties”, is an annual convention that brought representatives of countries and organization altogether in constructing global structure that would end the people of the world from being exposed to catastrophic effects of climate change. However, the 21st edition of COP which falls this year is different. On the 17th edition of COP in 2011, world leaders alongside with representative of interested parties contributing in the battle against climate change have invested a promise that by 2015, a global, legally binding regulation would be universally enforced. If Paris fails to reach an agreement, this year would mark the failure of every pledge the conference has pursued for twenty one years.
“Divided Unity: 1.5 degree versus 2 degree limit on global temperature”
The fifty-pages long pledge, submitted to the UN months before the conference is consisted of hundreds measures that will be used in tackling climate change issue, from radical means in decreasing use of fossil fuel to minimum number, to slashing off greenhouse effect in the most effective way. If this pledge is to be ratified by all countries and enforced as a legally binding regulation, the target to limit the increase of global temperature by 2100 would theoretically be achieved.
However, the riff of the debate was shown prominently when more ambitious measures to decrease the 2 degree limit started to be introduced on Thursday (10/12). The proposal that was endorsed by developed countries led by the European Union and US is deemed as political by representatives of developing countries and mainstream media. Europe’s leading internet media, politico.eu, argues that such effort was taken to divide away smaller developing countries –small non-industrialized island countries— from developing countries with emerging economy like Saudi Arabia, India and Indonesia to back-up their proposal on 1.5 degree deal. Island countries are the most vulnerable to climate change’s exposure, as they are most likely to be submerged underwater if the level of sea’s surface keeps increasing. The 1.5 degree deal is certainly feasible for countries like Barbados, who possesses one of the world’s smallest carbon footprint, or as it is as easy for developed EU’s countries with its sophisticated environmental friendly technology, and half of their manufacturing industries already being moved to industrialized developing countries. On contrary, the 1.5 degree proposal would drain economic development of the emerging market countries that earn most of its income from their industrial complexes, not to mention the massive investment from automotive industry in countries like India and Indonesia these days. The proposal has been doubted as practical, as to meet the measures, countries have to stop the usage of fossil fuel by this year. This is because the global temperature has increased for 1 degree since industrial age, and the margin of 0.5 degree is almost impossible to maintain. Not to mention the fact that there are currently many developing countries who have not reached an optimum level of industrialization to backbone their economy.
“REDD+: Forgotten In The Pursuit of The Grandiose 1.5 Degree Ambition”
Indonesia as one of the countries that would be greatly burdened by the ambitious 1.5 degree deal, sway her attention to the stronger enforcement of the REDD+ through adaptation and mitigation measures adopted from the recent Bonn Meeting. Indonesia, annually devastated by the rampaged case of deforestation holds up the importance of decreasing the level of toxic waste from specified causes before jumping directly to the grand ambition of limiting global temperature from 2 degree to 1.5 degree. Indonesia’s Forestry and Environment Minister, SIti Nurbaya Bakar, as the representative of Indonesia in COP21 argues that by extensive enforcement of REDD+ it will automatically decrease the harmful carbon emission, and with a more distinct and focus measures as well.
For many years, Indonesia has been suffering from annual deforestation that led to the extinction of many endangered animals and the shrinking number of forest each year. The reason to this catastrophic, yet recurring event with least possibility for a holistic measure to stop it as a whole is rather simple: market’s demands. Indonesia, being one of the largest countries in the world, still relies heavily on the production of its natural resources as main commodity. The same goes to the production of palm oil as the nation is predicated as world’s biggest palm oil producer, only closely followed by Malaysia. European Union, on the other hand, is a massive consumption of palm oil. Used for their production of deodorants, make-ups, chocolates –which now has been strictly regulated under RSPO— and biofuels, EU’s half of palm oil imports come from Indonesia. EU’s recent biofuel policy that sets to proliferate the usage of biofuel from fossil fuel has exacerbated the issue of deforestation in Indonesia (because the usage of palm oil for biofuel has not been closely monitored under RSPO or any form of quality standardization). To produce biofuels, acres of valuable forest in Indonesia get to be burned down to open field for the plantation of biofuels’ original sources, like palm trees and maize.
This issue was left unnoticed in the COP 21 where European Union was too absorbed in its pursuit of endorsing the 1.5 degree goal by their plan to finance –their COP21 alliance— small countries in Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (who are most vulnerable to climate change’s impacts) in constructing resilient measures to suppress carbon emission. A climate financing fund as big as 457 million euros will be liquidized by the supranational body as the alliance came into life during COP 21. This action is certainly beneficial for the small countries who are desperately trying to save their nations from being submerged, or continue
using low-tech, environmentally damaging technology; nevertheless this shall not be the only focus that the European Union invests their efforts to curb climate change effects to. These countries –who are predominantly small and are not accounted to high number of carbon footprint— will still suffer from climate change’s impacts if the emerging market countries like Indonesia, who is accounted for one of the world’s biggest carbon footprint, does not put a strict measure to its deforestation. REDD+ should be upheld more thoroughly in the COP21 and shall be incorporated strongly in the pledge, if it is to be given more attention from developed countries that are indirectly responsible for the increasing number of deforestation, it is not a mission of impossibility to radically curb the climate change’s effects effectively in fifty years. Specified measures done to mitigate the biggest causes of environmental damage would give the pursuit an imminent efficiency that would save up both the cost and the time taken.