We need solutions for climate change

There is fragility in the ecosystems including hilly and mountainous areas, forests, riverbanks, lakeshores and rangelands that are facing encroachment and degradation. Pollution levels have exponentially increased and the country is contending with new and emerging environmental issues arising from e-waste, unsound use of chemicals, oil and gas development and the impacts of climate change such as droughts, floods, storms, heat waves and landslides.

Yet our leaders and politicians are not moving quickly enough to mitigate the effects of climate change. Wouldn’t this have been a matter of urgency? Why are politicians, leaders and policy makers not pushing harder for more renewable energy and less coal, oil and gas?

The worst times humanity has ever experienced are in sight where our land shall experience higher temperatures in addition to the fires, droughts and floods that are already costing us billions.

Recently,  I asked some Members of Parliament if they can deliberate and put a gradually increasing price on carbon emissions at the mines or wells and return these pollution fees to consumers, which scientists and economists say is the fastest and least painful way to rein in emissions. What do I hear? Amazingly nothing.

 In 2015 The Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative (ND-GAIN) Index ranked Uganda as the 9th most vulnerable and 27th least ready to adapt to climate change. So now in such seemingly turbulent times, would we band together to request for practical climate change solutions. Would we keep our planet alive so that we have a better future we are bequeathing to the next generation.

In terms of energy approximately 93 percent of Uganda’s energy needs are met by biomass, which is used by households and small-scale industries. With 12 percent of the population connected to the power grid, electricity consumption accounts for only 1 percent of energy use, and the remaining 6 percent  of energy needs are met by oil. The obvious solution on limiting climate change is to “dramatically accelerate the switch to clean renewable energy” to contribute significantly to carbon mitigation. The continued increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide indicates an epic policy failure so far.

It is already widely accepted that extreme weather events have been increasing and exacerbating climatic debates in recent years. The National Environment Management Authority state of environment report (NEMA, 2012) estimates losses and damage to the tune of $47 million to crops, which is equal to about 3 per cent of the value of all cash and food crops in that year. Other extreme events have resulted in even bigger losses, possibly as much as 30 percent of the sector’s normal output.

Climate change damage estimates in the agriculture, water, infrastructure and energy sectors collectively amount to 2 to 4 percent of the GDP between 2010 and 2050. The national-level studies show that if no adaptive action is taken, annual costs could be in the range of $3.2 - 5.9 billion within a decade, with the biggest impacts being on water, followed by energy, agriculture, and infrastructure. Over the 40 years from 2010-2050, the costs of inaction are estimated at between $273b and Shs437 b. Even if there were no further increases in climate impacts, the cost of inaction would rise over time.

Mr Patrick  Kajuma Kagaba  MPA Student at UMI