Campaigning for a greener future

Britain’s Response To The Maldives Going Carbon Neutral

Living in a country where a rise in sea level of 1.5m would see your entire nation looking like the next Atlantis is bound to leave you feeling concerned that the global community is doing enough to stop climate change changing the look of the world as we know it. In light of this, President of the Maldives, Mohamed Nasheed, has pledged a 10 year target for the country to be carbon neutral.

The country wants to achieve this by installing solar panels, erecting 155 wind turbines and burning coconut husks as fuel. The country is looking for international investment to help them achieve their goals, and stated in a video broadcast to viewers at Sunday night’s premiere of Age of Stupid that if the developed countries don’t help them now, they won’t be here to be able to help the developed countries at their hour of need.

Following the broadcast, once the cheers of support for the Maldives had died down, director of the film, Franny Armstrong, welcomed Ed Miliband on stage and challenged him to answer when Britain would be carbon neutral. And Britain’s official response? We will have cut 80% of our carbon emissions by 2050. So ok, we shouldn’t complain that the government is actually making targets, and substantial ones at that. First for the cynical point of how often does the government manage to meet targets? Secondly, how, when a developing nation of 1200 islands can make a pledge to be producing no overall carbon emissions within 10 years, does a developed, technology rich country, with money, have the gaul to say we’re still going to be producing 20% of our carbon emissions after 41 years of trying. Come on Britain, is this really acceptable?


Posted in Environmental ImpactEnvironmental PoliticsGreen Planet
Tagged
Bookmark the permalink. Follow comments with the RSS feed for this post. Post a Comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

One Comment

  1. It seems as if the government pay lip service to making commitments but when it comes to the crunch, they prefer to choose the option that costs them less in the long run. If they were as serious about cutting carbon as they say, why would it be so much easier for people to oppose wind farms than new housing developments? This is just another example of where politics doesn’t work when it comes to sorting out the real problems of the world.

    Posted by Jayne March 17, 2009 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is kept private. Required fields are marked *