CLIMATE SOLUTIONS AND REAL LIVES IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD
Source: Drawdown Lift Fact Sheet
was damaged by a recent cyclone.’ The reality is that people live their lives in integrated, holistic ways, and therefore it doesn’t make sense to think that we can address climate change in a silo, separate from, for instance, addressing poverty. OFQ : But doesn’t this add further trillions of cost to the other trillions we also don’t have? KPP: The cost of action pales in comparison to the cost of inaction. We did rough estimates and found that implementing the set of Project Drawdown solutions yields net operational savings of four to five times the cost of inaction. We estimated the cost of implementation at US$22-28 trillion versus US$95-145 trillion as the cost of inaction. And helping people recover from climate-magnified disasters is enormously expensive. OFQ : Energy transition and bridging the gap between energy access and climate action is very important to the OPEC Fund. How do you address the issue? KPP: We are following three approaches. The first approach involves building resilience to climate risks through
adaptation. The second approach focuses on accelerating the transition to a low emission economy. And the third approach prioritizes strengthening partnerships. Energy poverty hits on all three themes, because people who don’t have access to electricity are less resilient to shocks. Providing clean electricity can really boost multiple aspects of human well-being. OFQ : How are you helping companies to move from the net offset approach which has become increasingly controversial? KPP: Offsets do have a role as part of the energy transition, but they need to be used wisely, sparingly, and without distracting us from the real job — which is reducing emissions by transitioning away from fossil fuels and moving toward renewable energy sources. It’s OK for me as an individual if I want to offset my flight from Washington DC to California, but the reality is that I need to just be flying less instead of offsetting my emissions. Companies need to have the same approach. If the offset payments are used to fund climate solutions in low- and middle-income
countries – such as enhanced solar, clean cooking, or protecting nature in ways that benefit people – that’s better than, for example, doing an offset in a forest that was already protected. The key message is that the idea that big companies can simply use offsets to reach net zero is just not true. OFQ : How do we make sure that climate solutions survive cataclysmic events or bad faith actors? KPP: Climate solutions aren’t immune to cataclysmic events like the COVID-19 pandemic. However, consumers, companies, and individuals can drive change, and we’ve seen that. In high- income places like the USA and European countries, the private sector and individuals are taking steps to reduce their emissions by installing solar or heat pumps, for example. People are choosing to drive less or walk or ride bikes more, and when they do have to buy a vehicle, more people are replacing old vehicles with an electric vehicle or a hybrid. I have also seen a lot of people changing their diets to be more plant-centered and making changes like wasting less food and composting food scraps.
40
Powered by FlippingBook