Joe Romm at Climate Progress points out that a new study rightly reiterates what we already know—that people in poorer, developing countries will suffer disproportionately from global warming even though they have contributed little or nothing to the crisis because they have historically been low-level emitters of greenhouse gases.
But the study commissioned by the University of Queensland and Wildlife Conservation Society takes that disproportionality argument too far, Romm writes, when it concludes the world’s biggest carbon polluters (now and historically) will suffer little from the ill effects of climate change:
The study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, asserts:
Some countries, such as China and the United States of America, are in a win-win position of achieving economic growth through fossil fuel use with few consequences from the resulting climate change, while many other, mostly Island and African, countries suffer low economic growth and severe, negative climate change impacts.
While the second half of that assertion is true, the first half is, quite frankly, absurd. China and the U.S. are both going to suffer devastating consequences from climate change — indeed, we already are.
To repeat, there is no denying the rich countries that still emit gargantuan amounts of carbon pollution have far more resources to deal with global warming changes that have begun. Nor can it be denied that the poor, developing nations will be affected unfairly by the consequences of global warming without having received a just share of the benefits from the vast amount of carbon pollution emitted by others. There is an emissions to vulnerability ratio. And that ratio definitely favors well-to-do nations like the United States.
But, as Romm notes, while it’s certainly true that the rich nations have gotten that way in great part from burning fossil fuels whose emissions are heating up the planet, the impacts are already happening to them, too, and these will worsen over time.
The list of vulnerabilities is long, Romm writes. It includes drought, storm surges, sea-level rise, extreme weather events, the broad impacts of acidifying oceans, migration of invasive species, spread of tropical diseases, and changes in the growing season. Nations with large coastal populations, such as the United States, China and India will see monster effects. According to Reuters, at least $1.4 trillion in homes and businesses are within one-eighth of a mile of the U.S. coastline.
He cites another study that says “drying will spread to 30 percent of land” and “even regions expected to get more rain, including important wheat, corn and rice belts in the western United States and southeastern China, will be at risk of drought.” These are not small matters. If you follow the subject even cursorily, you can add your own list of impacts.
Romm continues:
For the new study to claim climate change is “win-win” for countries like China and the U.S. simply has no basis in fact. And the study has been generating equally inaccurate headlines, like this one in Time magazine: “The U.S. emits the second most greenhouse emissions but is largely shielded from the worst effects.” There is no such shield.
Nonetheless, while the study wrongly suggests that the rich nations will be “free riders” when it comes to climate change impacts, its authors are quite correct in concluding that “it is time that this persistent and worsening climate inequity is resolved, and for the largest emitting countries to act on their commitment of common but differentiated responsibilities.”