Print

Mail

wiki links

EDITORIAL: Make a commitment to going green

When US President George W. Bush’s administration declined yet again last week to take action to regulate carbon emissions, its excuse was farcical. The US Environmental Protection Agency cited the “great complexity, controversy and active legislative debate” as reasons for postponing measures that the US Supreme Court ordered implemented last year.The news broke just days after G8 leaders — including Bush — agreed in Japan to a “vision” of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050, and one day before Bush repeated his call to open protected areas of Alaska to oil drilling. Bush will be remembered as the US president who did nothing when the urgency of global warming was crystal clear.

But the US is hardly alone in dodging its environmental responsibilities. Earlier this month, Minister of Economic Affairs Yiin Chii-ming (尹啟銘) said the government would put off regulatory action on emissions and rely instead on encouraging voluntary reductions.

While South Korea has “implemented coercive measures” to cut carbon emissions, Yiin said, “Our government believes that saving energy is a universal value and will gain public support.”

Yiin’s optimism sounded like a bad joke given the nation’s track record, with emissions that continue to grow at an embarrassing rate.

The question is how long it will take for the public and companies to set the nation on the right track without government regulation and whether we — and the world — can afford to wait that long. Initiatives such as the Industrial Technology Research Institute’s implementation of energy-saving measures and a green pact among 53 hospitals, hotels and department stores are encouraging, but no more than a drop in the bucket.

Hoping that a solution to environmental concerns will materialize without government action is unwise and ludicrous. It would also seem to contradict Yiin’s statement the same day about the administration’s vision for the environment — reining in greenhouse-gas emissions and lowering them to their 2000 level by 2025.

And just two days after Yiin’s remarks, Council for Economic Planning and Development Chairman Chen Tain-jy (陳添枝) called for legislation to regulate emissions cuts, saying the nation could “wait no longer.”

Chen emphasized the economic benefits of going green, noting that it would spur growth in eco-friendly technology and products. Indeed, the energy-saving campaign at the 53 hospitals, hotels and stores is expected to pour NT$1.04 billion (US$33 million) into the green-product industry within three years, while reducing the participants’ combined emissions by 83,000 tonnes.

If President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wants to succeed where his predecessor achieved little, his voice is needed in this debate. Ma should make clear his administration’s goals for the environment and how it intends to meet them.

If ambitious emissions reductions are to be realized over the next few decades, the government must recognize its role in bringing about change by seeking legally binding environmental targets.

At a time when it is scrambling to deliver on its promises of a stronger economy, working for environmental conservation is not out of synch with these goals. As Chen said, the switch to a green economy and infrastructure holds its own promise.

There is money to be made by cleaning up our act, but more importantly, the price of not doing so may be too dear.
This story has been viewed 1115 times.