Post

The green Greenland?

Published 11th November 2009 - 5 comments - 380 views -

Greenland, which is a part of Denmark now with home rule government, will be severely affected by climate change.

In fact Greenland has been used as a window of climate change effects and The Danish minister of Climate has invited several top politicians to the icefiord at Ilulissat to see the icebergs melt.

Therefore it sounds like a joke when Greenland wants to emit 14 times more CO2 per citizen. It would mean 170 tons pr.citizen.

The chief of the home rule government Kuupik Kleist has gone as far as to state that Greenland will not approve an agreement at COP15 if Greenland is not permitted to have higher emissions.

But why would Greenland on purpose destroy their own island?

The answer is Denmark. Greenland is not a sovereign state, but a part of Denmark. A liaison that Greenland has wanted to end for ages. The problem is though, that Greenland at the moment only survives because of the subsidies from Denmark, and without a new economy they cannot do without Denmark's support. They are not able to do their indigenous profession because of legislation and they need to make money some way. And that way is adding new, heavy industries to their economy, according to the home rule government.

In 2007 Greenland emitted 650.000 tons of CO2. But the number could increase up to 10 million tons if Greenland implements new industries. At the moment they are working on an agreement with an American company to build an aluminium melting facility. An industry that will double the emissions of the island. Also international mine and gas companies are investigating the underground and seas of Greenland as well as an oil industry might be on its way.

 

Reductions

In Denmark the climate minister does not see the permission to emit eight times the amount of the American population coming their way.

Greenland is at the moment far from fulfilling the goals of a reduction of eight percent within 2012 compared with the level of emissions in 1990 that they signed up for as a part of the Kyoto agreement. Since Greenland is a part of Denmark and not a sovereign state they cannot negotiate at the climate convention, but is a part of the Danish negotiation delegation.

Until now the Danish government and Greenland has not been able to reach an agreement and Greenland is considering leaving the Danish delegation and instead negotiating with the G77, the union of poor countries. Since Greenland has a great symbolic significance it would be problematic for the Danish Climate minister if they part from the Danish delegation.

 

The paradox

Greenland does not want to be a museum for climate change and that is understandable.

It is also easy to understand, that they want to build up their own industry and become a sovereign state independent of Denmark. Having the characteristics that Greenland has also means that some industries might be better of in Greenland than others.

But it is also easy to understand that the Danish government does not want to give Greenland the permission to have higher emissions because it will weaken their position at the summit. The government also states that Greenland in many ways cannot be compared to the other poor countries, just look at their BNP, and that is clear as well.

But on the other hand it is no wonder that Greenland find it unfair that they must pay all quotas if they start oil industry while most of the oil producing countries does not pay for the CO2 emission that the production is responsible for. Big producers in the Middle East has not signed the Kyoto protocol. That the price of oil production in Greenland might be higher due to the tough climate and the neccesitiy of buying quotas may also scare the investors away, fears Greenland.

And they state, that if they are to pay for all their quotas then should oil industry in the Baltic and the aluminium production in Europe pay for theirs as well.

Welcome to Greenland and the climate changes– the Gordian knot…


Comments

  • Daniel Nylin Nilsson on 11th November 2009:

    Complicated knot, in deed… i really understand the Greenlanders desire to find employment opportunities for themselves. On the other hand I can’t see that installing aluminium melting plants on previously untouched grounds is exactly what the world needs now.

    by the way, I guess you mean “GNP”, not “BNP”? wink

  • Benno Hansen on 12th November 2009:

    Good catch, Petrine. I’d missed this one. Perhaps an illustration of denial mechanism: as you get closer to a dam, worries about flooding increases, but right under the dam no-one is worrying.

  • Paul Montariol on 19th November 2009:

    I have read elsewhere and on this platform that greenland was harvesting corn 1000 years before!
    Think about it!

  • Benno Hansen on 19th November 2009:

    I did think about that, Paul. I also read about it. Did you?

  • Paul Montariol on 20th November 2009:

    What you mean exactly?

Comments

  • Remember my personal information

    Notify me of follow-up comments?

    --- Let's see if you are human ---

    Who are kings of the jungle: lions or zebras? Add a questionmark to your answer. (6 character(s) required)

[close]