Sue the UK for starting the industrial revolution??
Discussion
I have to be honest, I'm surprised – given that a good proportion of the world likes to hate England, and a good proportion of England likes hating itself – that this nonsense hasn't already gained traction. With people like Thomas Newcomen, James Watt and Richard Trevithic being vilified as bringers of global environmental catastrophe.
I can see the case for holding countries responsible for the consequences of their choices after it became clear and internationally accepted what was happening - say around 1990 - before then, nope.
We were responsible for a huge proportion of the global emissions before anyone knew that it was a problem, but that doesn't seem to me reasonable grounds for liability. In terms of +/- change since 1990, we've cut our emissions faster than any other developed country.
If we are going to be held responsible for the consequences of inventing the Industrial Revolution, we should be allowed to pay the reparations out of our share of the global productivity it also spawned. I think we would still be very comfortably in the black.
https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global...
We were responsible for a huge proportion of the global emissions before anyone knew that it was a problem, but that doesn't seem to me reasonable grounds for liability. In terms of +/- change since 1990, we've cut our emissions faster than any other developed country.
If we are going to be held responsible for the consequences of inventing the Industrial Revolution, we should be allowed to pay the reparations out of our share of the global productivity it also spawned. I think we would still be very comfortably in the black.
https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global...
I'm not sure the ruling is reflected in the article.
I've read a brief precis of the ruling and it doesn't mention the industrial revolution - which wasn't invented.
From what I've read, it's not even historical. If countries fail to reduce their global warming emissions then countries which are affected negatively and suffer some form of loss, albeit these are the vast majority, if not all, countries, then they might be able to claim reparations. Not quite as likely to raise the ire of some, but it seems closer to the truth.
Edited to add from Guardian news:
Under international law, countries are now bound to rapidly reduce their emissions below 1.5 degrees of warming. Failure to do so could result in developed countries like Australia having to pay monetary compensation to developing countries or being required to rebuild infrastructure and restore ecosystems damaged by climate change. This means we could be entering a new era of climate reparations.
I've read a brief precis of the ruling and it doesn't mention the industrial revolution - which wasn't invented.
From what I've read, it's not even historical. If countries fail to reduce their global warming emissions then countries which are affected negatively and suffer some form of loss, albeit these are the vast majority, if not all, countries, then they might be able to claim reparations. Not quite as likely to raise the ire of some, but it seems closer to the truth.
Edited to add from Guardian news:
Under international law, countries are now bound to rapidly reduce their emissions below 1.5 degrees of warming. Failure to do so could result in developed countries like Australia having to pay monetary compensation to developing countries or being required to rebuild infrastructure and restore ecosystems damaged by climate change. This means we could be entering a new era of climate reparations.
Edited by Derek Smith on Thursday 24th July 15:26
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff