January 21, 2001
Rev. Andrea Harrison
Responsive Reading: Psalm 29
Hebrew Scripture Reading: Genesis 1:1-2:3
(From the children’s time:
"In 1896 a Swedish chemist discovered the greenhouse effect, and said that if we go on doing what we are doing, we will be growing oranges and bananas in Scotland.") [From a lecture by Dr. William Fife, broadcast on CBC Radio "Ideas" on January 17, 2001]
So, we aren't yet seeing oranges and bananas being grown in Scotland yet, but the predictions of environmental changes, as a result of our technology and lifestyles, have been coming true right under our noses.
In the last 100 years, we have changed our planet!
A week ago in El Salvador a massive earthquake rocked the country, leaving 650 people dead, hundreds missing, and about three million people – nearly half of El Salvador's population – without clean water. This, however, wasn’t just a natural disaster. In Santa Tecla where a massive landslide buried up to 500 homes, officials are blaming builders who removed trees to build mansions. The earthquake loosened a hillside in the neighbourhood of Las Colinas, bringing mud, and debris crashing down on homes below. Residents had asked the government to stop the construction of mansions above them, arguing the lack of trees left them vulnerable to landslides. Congress didn't respond to their requests, and the Supreme Court allowed the construction to continue. Now, environmentalists say Congress and the court were negligent, while Santa Tecla's mayor is condemning builders.
At the turn of the last century, we had the invention of the automobile. As I mentioned to the kids, "Forty years ago, there were 60 million cars in the world. Twenty years later, there were 300 million. Now we're up to 600 million and still counting. We also know that what's coming out of all of these tail pipes is affecting our health and changing the climate. Three-quarters of all of our air pollution comes from transportation. About half of that comes from cars and light trucks. Now, contributing to greenhouse gases has been added to the list of the car's bad habits.
Nations, corporations, interest groups, and individuals have been debating how to limit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
In October 1988, there was a climate change conference convened in Toronto. "At this conference governments pledged first to stabilize their carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2000 and then to achieve a reduction of 20% from 1990 levels by 2005." Maurice Strong, Canadian businessman, diplomat, and environmentalist laments that, "Not only were the Toronto targets not met, but most industrialized countries, including Canada, continued to increase their emissions afterwards." (Maurice Strong, Where on Earth are We Going? ©2000)
Maurice Strong then laboured intensely to help the preparations for the 1992 "Earth Summit" in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Rio was a ground breaking event, with a thousand or so delegates, plus an accompanying forum of non-governmental organizations with vested interests in the environment.
One of the speakers at the Earth Summit in Rio was 12 year old Severn Cullis-Suzuki, daughter of environmentalist David Suzuki. She admonished the delegates with these words, "Parents used to be able to comfort their children by saying, 'Everything is going to be all right; we're doing the best we can and it's not the end of the world.'" But, she went on, "You can't say that to us any more. Our planet is becoming worse and worse for all future children. Yet we only hear adults talking about local interests and national priorities. Are we even on your list of priorities? You grown-ups say you love us, but we challenge you to make your actions reflect your words." (Strong, p228)
Five years later, in 1997, at another environmental conference, this time in Japan, there was the Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emission levels. Now you need to remember that in 1988 governments pledged first to stabilize their carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2000 and then to achieve a reduction of 20% from 1990 levels by 2005.
The 1997 Kyoto accord called for a five-per-cent average cut in developed nations' 1990 levels of emissions by 2010. There, Canada agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent by 2012, the U.S. agreed to seven per cent.
In November, last year, international delegates at a conference in the Netherlands looked at ways to implement the Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emission levels.
"Europe came to the conference with a united position and that position put it into direct conflict with the so-called Umbrella group, which includes the United States, Canada, Russia and Japan. For two weeks the two sides battled in speeches, in briefings and in behind-closed-door negotiations. Much of it was highly technical but the core of the dispute was quite simple. The Umbrella group wanted to be given big environmental credits for their forests and for money spent to plant forests in other countries.
"The forests act as "sinks" soaking up carbon dioxide. The Europeans said that getting credit for sinks was merely a way of finessing the key issue of how to reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions from cars and industry. If the Umbrella group was given credits for its sinks, countries like the U.S. and Canada, which have yet to start to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, would be given treaty carte blanche to increase those emissions.
"The Americans made a concession on behalf of the Umbrella group. They would drop the idea of getting credits for money paid to plant forests in developing countries. Canada, too, made a concession, dropping its demand that nuclear power be considered a plus in what is called the Clean Development Mechanism." (Don Murray, senior correspondent for CBC-TV)
These concessions were considered insufficient, and negotiations for an international commitment and plan to address the issue of global warming failed.
"The next meeting on global warming won’t take place until next May. For many environmentalists the collapse of The Hague talks was a disaster. (With the newly installed) American president, George W. Bush, they believe the Americans will be even less willing to agree to new restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions in a few months’ time. And unseemly squabbling among European ministers won’t put any more pressure on the Americans and their Umbrella allies." (Don Murray)
So that's just some of the bad news. So what's the good news?
Did you know that Cornwall Electric built the first co-generation power
system in southern Canada with a capacity to produce heat as a byproduct of electrical generation. The system generates about four per cent of the city’s electricity needs. Using co-generation for heat and power has reduced fuel consumption and greenhouse gases by up to 30 per cent. (Ontario government report)
Did you know that Honda and Toyota are producing hybrid electric cars that use a combination of gas and of electric cells that are recharged as one drives?
Projects to harness tidal energy, wind power, and solar energy are being pursued more seriously.
In Britain, they have found a species of algae that converts water into hydrogen.
In the past, we have demanded that science address our needs for comfort, convenience, and cost. When we think about spending money we may ask ourselves: "Will that bring me comfort or pleasure?" "Will it make life easier or more convenient?" "Can I afford it?"
If we want to save our planet, it's not necessarily that we have to get busy doing things, it's that we have to change our values. We will have to ask ourselves constantly, "What impact will this have on the environment, on the world?" We can no longer make choices just on the basis of comfort, convenience, and cost.
Think of what we spend on our houses to give us comfort and pleasure. The manse committee, for example, has, to my delight, gotten estimates on the cost of installing central air conditioning. That will make us comfortable, but will, as I think about it now, add to the problem of global warming. Perhaps we should be looking at the cost and practicality of installing a solar panel on the roof of the manse, and make the most of that southern exposure.
In fact, why is it, that in this modern era of technology and relative prosperity in our country, all houses don't have solar panels on the roof? On the east coast of Nicaragua, there is a water purification project, in part funded by the United Church of Canada, that is operated by solar power. If they can do it, why can't we?
And why don't all farms have windmills? Imagine if you could run your corn dryers using wind generated energy?
Why is it that we drive to places when we have the physical ability to walk?
Why is it that an employer can give you a free parking space without it being a taxable benefit, but a free bus pass would be a taxable benefit?
We have developed such busy and complicated lives that we have become disconnected from our environment, and ignored the consequences of our lifestyles. I don't think this is what God had in mind when s/he gave us the ability to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over ... every living thing that moves upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)
Dr. William Fife, world renowned geochemist at (Western University in London, Ontario?), believes that we can solve most of the world’s problems if we have literate, educated people with freedom of information, access to the best information, and time to think about it. That’s encouraging. It also makes me glad that our Church Presbytery and the Char-Lan High School have raised enough money now to build a school in the developing world through the organization "Free the Children".
It also makes me think of URRACAN, a grass-roots university on the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua, that used its contacts to become affiliated with York University in Toronto, while at home working very hard to develop programmes to address their local environmental, health, education, and economic issues. One of their campuses didn’t even have a phone, but they were doing some serious, well informed, and highly relevant education.
So what are we to do?
As Maurice Strong says, "The doomsday clock is ticking toward a day of reckoning if we fail to change our ways."
If we are going to change our ways, we have to have a core value, that places environmental concerns ahead of our desires for comfort, convenience, and cost. To do that, I think we have to love our world - the trees, the air we breath and water we drink, the bio-diversity that surrounds us, the night sky, the crunch of snow. And we need to give ourselves time to be in love with our world.
Do you have time to be in love with our world? Do you have time to go cross-country skiing or to go skating on the outdoor ice-rink? Do you have time to grow your own vegetables? Do you have time to gaze out of the window at freshly fallen snow.
As we kindle our love of nature, and our passion for our world, we are reconnecting, I think, with our God, who is passionately in love with all of creation. Perhaps such love and passion would strengthen our commitment to live in closer harmony with our environment.
It's not too late to save our planet. In the words of Maurice Strong, we have to continue to try. "We must. We have no other legitimate choice. The future of the earth as a secure and hospitable home for those who follow is in our hands."
