Although it was agreed that developing nations required aid to reduce global carbon emissions, the United Nations Energy Program focused today on strategies for developed nations. The delegation of Peru pointed out that although their country is a developing one, it is extremely green and, in fact, far more environmentally friendly than most developed nations. Switzerland gave a possible explanation for this phenomenon, describing how a stable, prosperous economy such as that of the United States of America is far more set in its ways than that of a developing country, and it is more difficult for a developed nation to change its systems to reflect greener alternatives. The delegation of the United States of America chimed in, stating that a transfer to green energy, such nuclear fusion (the obsessive fixation of the delegation of France) – could result in economic collapse. If a total switch to any alternative energy type were made, many of the people working in the current energy sector would lose their jobs, and the economy would suffer, possibly affecting other countries as well.
The promise of a possible green energy source of the future that could be one hundred percent safe was not enough to woo the delegate of India. Calling France’s proposition dangerous, expensive, and time-consuming, India suggested investment not in the development of nuclear fusion technology, but in the promotion of the benefits of green alternatives to consumers. The delegate of the Russian Federation fully supported this motion, stating that not every nation is as in favour of nuclear energy as France. Emphasizing the importance of making the dangers of climate change clear to the general public, the delegate of Norway made the committee aware of the common assumption that the status quo would be fine. Because the present does not currently reflect the possible impending effects of greenhouse gases and climate change, such as overwhelming drought and acid rain, many people believe that climate change is not a real danger. As Norway clarified, global warming will be nearly impossible to stop once it gets going, and that the international community would have to actively remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere in order to prevent any effects at all.
The delegation of China added that the sole motivation needed for developed countries to change their ways should be their dependence on fossil fuels. As countries deplete natural resources, they jeopardize their energy security, and this should be initiative enough for governments and international communities to want to move towards a green future. However, the delegation of South Africa pointedly stated that many of the solutions being proposed, such as an increased reliance on alternative energy sources or education programs for the general public, may not work to the same degree of efficacy in both developed and developing nations. South Africa continued to propose that the committee should focus the discussion on solutions that are applicable to all countries. The delegation of Russia echoed this sentiment, saying, “How is it not important to talk about developing nations?”
The promise of a possible green energy source of the future that could be one hundred percent safe was not enough to woo the delegate of India. Calling France’s proposition dangerous, expensive, and time-consuming, India suggested investment not in the development of nuclear fusion technology, but in the promotion of the benefits of green alternatives to consumers. The delegate of the Russian Federation fully supported this motion, stating that not every nation is as in favour of nuclear energy as France. Emphasizing the importance of making the dangers of climate change clear to the general public, the delegate of Norway made the committee aware of the common assumption that the status quo would be fine. Because the present does not currently reflect the possible impending effects of greenhouse gases and climate change, such as overwhelming drought and acid rain, many people believe that climate change is not a real danger. As Norway clarified, global warming will be nearly impossible to stop once it gets going, and that the international community would have to actively remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere in order to prevent any effects at all.
The delegation of China added that the sole motivation needed for developed countries to change their ways should be their dependence on fossil fuels. As countries deplete natural resources, they jeopardize their energy security, and this should be initiative enough for governments and international communities to want to move towards a green future. However, the delegation of South Africa pointedly stated that many of the solutions being proposed, such as an increased reliance on alternative energy sources or education programs for the general public, may not work to the same degree of efficacy in both developed and developing nations. South Africa continued to propose that the committee should focus the discussion on solutions that are applicable to all countries. The delegation of Russia echoed this sentiment, saying, “How is it not important to talk about developing nations?”