RussiaPresident Putin recently visited UAE but did not attendUnited Nations28th Climate Summit (COP28). At the same time, a meeting on the sidelines of the summit discussed the carbon emissions problem caused by the Russia-Ukraine war. Civil society organizations advocated that war initiators should be responsible for disaster damage and carbon emission costs and use new technologies to reduce carbon emissions as much as possible for future reconstruction.
“I controlled my emotions and walked to the Russian pavilion at COP28. They had caused a lot of carbon emissions because of their aggression, and they were selling nuclear energy technology, claiming that it would contribute to reducing carbon emissions. “Also, my 11-year-old son had to hide in an air raid shelter after school.” a person fromukraineSpeaking to the audience at an extravaganza on 4 December.
The War Greenhouse Gas Calculation Initiative, established as a result of the Russo-Ukrainian War, is dedicated to accounting for wartime carbon emissions. Lead researcher Clark said they used satellite maps, trade data and other tools to calculate the amount of fossil fuels and transportation vehicles that moved to and from the war zone during the war. Fires, refugee movements and future reconstruction were also taken into account. He calculated that in the 18 months since the war began, 150 million tons of carbon emissions occurred. “Without the war, none of these carbon emissions would have occurred.”
Kiva, Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources of Ukraine, said that Ukraine was originally a developed country with deep climate ambitions, but now all net-zero targets have been destroyed; According to official data, since the outbreak of the war, 600 species of animals and 750 species of plants are on the verge of extinction in Ukraine. The carbon emissions of the war exceed those of developed countries such as Belgium, and the social cost of carbon (SCC) is roughly estimated to be around US$10 billion.
Clarke said the Paris Agreement does not address emissions caused by war, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) lacks accountability mechanisms for military carbon emissions, leaving attackers with no recourse. Allows harm to the environment. It is necessary to establish a new international compensation mechanism to make Russia, which has been waging aggression and war, pay for carbon emissions. “Ukraine can use the compensation fund to develop renewable energy and use new technologies to reduce carbon emissions during the reconstruction process, to avoid continuing damage to the Earth after the war.”
Lebchin, who chaired the meeting, said he hoped the discussions would lead to international consensus and guidelines on sanctions. “If the offending country had to pay a heavy burden for carbon emissions, would they think twice before taking action?” War carbon emissions have a price, increasing the cost of starting a war is a means of reducing the war.
Another side meeting called on countries to reduce military spending while pursuing the goals of “peace” and “climate justice”.
Banzing, a member of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), said the military is one of the driving factors of the climate crisis, contributing about 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and this figure does not even include war. . emissions. Evidence shows that military emissions are closely linked to military spending, and global military spending is projected to exceed US$2 trillion in 2022, a record high, “with only US$100 billion pledged by countries.” Compared to the Climate Fund target, which has not yet been achieved.”
Professor Christopher Crawford of Oxford University said that on average, the risk of war is really very low, but the risk of a climate crisis is 100%. We must think about balancing these risks rather than investing all resources in response. The climate crisis is going in the opposite direction.
In an interview with this newspaper, Kotero, an environmental policy expert at the Association of Conflict and Environmental Observers, said that given Taiwan’s political situation, it is not possible to reduce the national defense force, but there is still a need for the military to increase transparency. Might be possible. of military carbon emissions data, “to promote the government’s creation of a low-carbon military that utilizes innovative technologies.”