World leaders are once again rejoining to discuss solutions to the ever-growing climate crisis.
Standing for the ‘Conference of the Parties,’ there is no lack of skepticism going into the event this year. Namely, the event is controversially being held in Dubai, in which not only are they one of the ten top oil-producing countries, but they are also seeking to increase in oil-production from their four million barrels a day record.
However, beyond the controversy lies the grave reality that underlines the importance of the event. According to Nature, there is up to a 66% chance of global average temperatures reaching 1.5 degrees greater than pre-industrial levels. Up to 90% of coral reefs would go extinct, a land area that amounts to the size of Japan. Not only this, floods, and wildfires would become exponentially more common, drastically shifting the climate of the world.
But what can we do? Where do we look? Perhaps we have the answer: A study by PLOS Climate has found that the world’s top 0.1% of the world’s carbon emissions amounts up to 8% of the world’s net emissions. In context, this means that a population of the size of Jordan contributes to the emissions of a population of the size of the entire European Union. As noted by Cambridge Sustainability commissions, if the richest 10% of society were to bring their carbon emissions in line with the level of the average European, and the remaining 90% of humanity made no adjustments to their lifestyle, then global emissions would drop by one-third in no more than a couple of years. Resolutions that have been raised include infrastructure that supports less reliance on cars and planes, taxes on meat and polluting forms of transport, restrictions on house sizes. The 2019 IGES Report recorded that honing in on the three domains of nutrition, housing, and mobility, would have the largest impact on reducing carbon footprints, as it accounts to 75% of total lifestyle carbon footprints.
So why hasn’t action been taken yet? Part of the reason lies in a greener lifestyle which inflicts damage on their wealth. The wealthy are the ones that are benefiting from the current system. Any change in the system would curtail their wealth, power, and fame. It would require the world’s rich to give up their private jets, fossil fuel investments, and lavish lifestyles to display on social media. Combined with the absence of significant economic pressure to become greener, there is little reason to change through a socioeconomic lens. To add fuel to the fire, the use of shaming and guilt-invoking campaigning in environmental campaigns at large may prove effective for most of the population, but for the wealthy, the opposite may be true. According to Jeremiah Bohr of the University of Illinois, among democrats in America, the richer the individual, the more likely they were to be in denial of climate change. Villainising the rich ultimately shames them, which combined with the idea of having to change lifestyle, invokes a self-defence mechanism in the form of climate denialism, explaining the finding.
Unfortunately, the richest also can be celebrities who are the role models for the younger generations, painting a picture of the idealistic lifestyle to be one that is most damaging to the climate. A prime example of this is Kylie Jenner, who has close to 400 million followers on instagram alone as of present, a large fraction of the 2 billion, largely young, monthly users on instagram, and a net worth of 750 million USD. Flaunting her unsustainable lifestyle, Jenner wrote July last year ‘you wanna take mine or yours’ as a caption to two private planes in the background of Jenner and her then partner, Travis Scott. This way, the normalisation of such lifestyles has been achieved.
By no means is this the end of the problem. As reported by Ajit Niranjan, in the annual Monaco yacht showcase, two buyers completely denied human activity as the cause of climate change, and one owner physically abused the reporter during the interview. Website DeSmog also has discovered that 85% of The Telegraph’s articles on climate change have engaged in climate denialism, and have gone as far as attacking pro-environment perspectives. The titles are fear-mongering, and are largely baseless. A prime example is “China’s secret weapon in its drive to subvert the West.” The ‘weapon’ is heat pumps, which has scientific backing of being twice as energy efficient than its oil counterparts. Hence, in a way, the rich are controlling the minds of the public to further their agenda, buying themselves time to further invest into fossil fuels without resistance.
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The way forward would be one that focuses on changing social normalities, which in turn would change the perspective and behaviour of the wealthiest. Real green technology must be normalised, and the wealthiest must see the sustainable lifestyle as an opportunity, not a burden. Heavy investment into green technology must take place to produce products that are more attractive than the unsustainable alternative. Taxes must be imposed upon luxuries in private planes and private islands. Sanctions must take place against fossil fuel investing billionaires so there is no other option but to opt for greener options. The public must always favour greener options so businesses can only make environmentally friendly options. This requires a major cultural shift. But this way, celebrities would become more sustainable, and so will their fans. This way, the richest are held accountable for the growing emission disparity they have created. This way, entire ecosystems would be saved, entire populations would not live under the fear of their homelands being washed away, and us as humans can protect everyone, collectively. Additionally, the platform for which climate change action can occur directly, COP 28, is consistently evolving and adapting to address the pressing global environmental challenges. This month, leaders must meet with the outcome of action being taken against the richest 1% so humanity can progress, together, again.