Imagine, there's a round-table meeting at the Pride Rock of all the top carnivores on the planet, like lions, tigers, wolves, jaguars, leopards, hyenas, etc. The event is being hosted and chaired by the much-liked Lion King, Simba. Members of the carnivore community from across the world descend on pride rock to wine, dine, and discuss. Mind you, this is not merely a seminar or just another gathering for the predatorial meat-eaters. But it is an ensemble of the top-of-the-very-top: the Alpha of the hunters, the king of the killer beasts. This conference, just like any other one of this scale, has a theme. And guess, what the theme for our imaginary conclave is? It's vegetarianism and how it could save the ecosystem. The carnivores gathered at Pride Rock are discussing vegetarianism and how it can benefit the world.
The irony of our imagination is not too dissimilar to the real-life duplicity that was much at display at Davos recently. The Who's Who of Uber-rich gentry landed in the quaint resort town of Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, for the World Economic Forum's (WEF) annual extravaganza. WEF is a Swiss non-profit foundation established in 1971, and is funded by around 1,000 member companies that have a turnover of more than $5 billion. The membership is not cheap either; as of 2011, an annual membership costs $62,000 for an individual member; $263,000 for an industry partner and $628,000 for a strategic partner. There's a theme for the conference every year. And this year's theme was ‘Stakeholders for a Sustainable and Cohesive World’.
Do the rich care for climate change?
All the global attendees at Davos made the right noises on climate change, sustainability, and its impact. In the run-up to the event, WEF's 2020 report had listed a whole list of environmental concerns as business challenges in the future. Extreme weather events, natural calamities, inability to tackle climate change, loss of biodiversity and anthropogenic emissions were listed as the top five concerns by the elite members. It was the very first time in over 14 years when environmental concerns grabbed all the top spots in the survey.
Yet, when the conference ended, there was no real consensus on how to deal with climate change-related issues. The contrast between deniers and decriers was most visible when President Donald Trump debunked activists like Greta Thunberg as "perennial prophets of Doom." Then you had Thunberg marching down the streets of Davos with her band of activists, slamming the Davos attendees for "too much talk and no action."
The question that we genuinely need to ask is that can the super-rich be really counted upon for leading action on climate change or heading to the science? The real impacts of climate change are borne by the most vulnerable and the marginalised. Take, for instance, the island nation of Maldives that is made up of 1,100 islands and is the world's lowest-lying nation. With the rising sea levels due to ice-melts in the Arctic and Antarctic, the lives of 325,000 people living in the country are under threat. Now, what's the worse that could happen to all these super-rich if the rising waters of the Indian Ocean engulf the islands of Maldives? They would lose a tourist destination; a couple of them might even incur financial losses as they would have made exotic homes in these beautiful island chains. While the ordinary citizens would lose lives and livelihood, the super-rich would merely incur financial losses. Little wonder then, beyond making those customary noises, the super-rich have much little to show in terms of action.
And the Maldives is just an instance, take the case of climate crisis in any part of the world. Be it the bushfires in Australia or California, the typhoons in the Philippines, tornados in Florida, the floods in India, the heatwaves in Europe, the impact is inversely proportional to the economic status, namely the richer you are, the less vulnerable you are to these climatic events.
The super-rich among us own a proverbial Ark thanks to their financial standing; they can safely sail on it in times of crisis.
CO2 emissions at Davos
Returning to Davos, there's much duplicity at display. All these powerful men (mind you, there are very few women) commuting to the scenic resort in their private jets and chartered helicopters. Marching along in bespoke Saville Row suits clutching their smart attaché, these gentlemen seem to be the most unaffected human lot of the climate change crisis. Take the case of last year, where the press had highlighted how close to 1,000 private jets had landed in Switzerland for the conference, where the attendees spoke passionately about cutting down CO2 emissions and saving the planet.
2020 would be carbon neutral (where they intend to offset the emissions by plantation drives in Amazon -- which BTW is still burning and none of the global leaders have a comment to make on it -- and a biogas plant in Switzerland. There are some other efforts undertaken, like cutting down on plastic, renewable energy, etc. But the emissions from guests are estimated to be some 20,000 metric tonnes of CO2 in private jet travels alone. That 20,000 mtCO2e are equivalent to emissions from the annual energy use of approximately 1,840 homes. The emission is roughly equal to the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from about 3,680 passenger vehicles. It is also equivalent to just over 46,000 barrels of oil consumed or 105 railcars' worth of coal.
And this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. There's much more emissions in towing all the necessities to a small little town (with no airport) to match up to the taste and liking of the super-rich.
WEF founder Klaus Schwab had shared a letter urging companies in attendance to commit to net-zero GHG emissions by 2050. How many corporations signed up for the same is not known.
Apart from Thunberg, the person who spoke the brightest and most rational on climate change was the heir to British Crown, Prince Charles. In his speech, he called for a green tax, greener fuels, hydrogen-powered planed by 2030. "Global warming, climate change, and the devastating loss of biodiversity are the greatest threats humanity has ever faced, and one largely of its own creation," he stated.
Prince Charles warned the attendees, "Do we want to go down in history as the people who didn't do anything to bring the world back from the brink? The only limit is our willingness to act and the time to act is now."
His voice was that of reason and reconciliation.
The only glitch was that Prince Charles was 'forced' to take a private jet to the Davos Conference. And he drove around in an electric Jaguar. The cost to the planet was a mere 6 tonnes of CO2 emissions. That's equivalent to the annual emissions of 3 average Indians. Guess even a sane voice of climate protection comes at a cost. A cost to our planet.
Shashwat DC is Founder Editor at Sustainabilityzero.com . With deep interest in history, and mythology, he is also a passionate champion of the environment & bio-diversity. Using his keyboard, he highlights issues related to sustainability, ESG, CSR, and sustainable development.
Read Shashwat's columns here.
