Reporting Carbon Footprints: A New Phenomenon

A paper delivered by Dr Marcel Mbamalu, CEO of Newstide Publications Limited, publishers of Prime Business Africa at the maiden edition of Asharami Square organised by Sahara Group in Lagos, Nigeria on Monday, 24 June 2024.

Introduction

The 21st century has continued to shatter records in environmental degradation, leading to rising temperatures and associated climatic disasters such as floods, hurricanes, tsunamis, high winds, droughts, and numbing cold weather. The decade of 2020-2029 may take over from 2010 – 2019 as the hottest decade ever recorded. As a result, interest in carbon emission as a major cause of climate change has been growing rapidly. The United Nations declared 2023 the hottest year in history, with projections that future years may still be warmer. At the recently concluded UN climate change conference in Dubai (COP 28), the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) pointed to record temperatures in 2023, at 1.40°C above the pre-industrial average (1850-1900). Petteri Taalas, the head of the WMO warned of “increasing concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases from human activities.” About the fast melting ice caps, UN Chief António Gutteres appealed for a “complete” phase-out of fossil fuels.

In 2022, over 56 million people went hungry due to extreme weather events, according to the United Nations. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) notes that nearly one-third (over 2.8 billion people) of the global population could be exposed to heat waves by 2090. Also during COP 28 in Dubai, a report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) showed that about 7% of global GDP (about $7 trillion) comes from public and private finance to bolster efforts to mitigate the negative impacts of climate change. This amount is 30 times the amount spent annually on clean energy solutions.

The worsening trend of climatic disaster has furthered the status of climate change as the defining crisis of the global age. Unfortunately, not every country is doing enough to protect themselves, even among the worst affected and the most at-risk. Some estimates say that between 2010 and 2020, people in regions that are vulnerable to climate disasters died at a rate 15 times higher than the mortality rate in regions with low vulnerability.

Carbon Footprint

The fight against global warming and its dire consequences have led to a number of initiatives, terms and key highlights, which help to clarify issues, improve general understanding of climate change and spur action to protect human life. This is in light of widespread misunderstanding, skepticism, lack of (political) will, and perplexing contradictions in the fight against climate change. 

Notably, the greatest limitation to the fight against climate change is not difficulty in taking action to slow global warming. It is the funny politics around climate change, which stokes unbelief, cover-ups, and climate irresponsibility among major environmental polluters. Carbon footprint has emerged as one of the initiatives, terms and key highlights in the efforts of the United Nations to explain culpability, responsibility, and expectations of countries, organisations and individuals in mitigating carbon emissions, and assuring a secure energy future.

Carbon footprint refers to the total quantity of greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide and methane) emitted into the atmosphere due to the activities of human beings such as industrial activities, mining and processing of fossil fuel, air conditioning, automobiles use, etc. These daily pump gases that foul the atmosphere, violate the ecosystem, trigger extreme weather events, threaten the food chain, and human survival. In countries worst affected by these events, single disasters like the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunamis killed about 230,000 people in Thailand, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and India in one swoop. Property destroyed defies quantification. While there have been arguments on the link between such disasters and climate change, scientists have proved that rising sea levels caused by climate change aggravate the impacts of tsunamis. 

Carbon footprint is therefore used to measure how much human activities affect the environmental forces that support life; in other words, how much human beings contribute to alterations in the climate system. Climate change refers to the shifts recorded in atmospheric conditions such as rainfall patterns, and temperature levels over long periods ranging from 50 years and above. 

There has been a scientific debate on how much humans cause climate change because there are other non-human factors such as solar variability and volcanic activity. Despite the debate, there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that human actions are contributing significantly in climate change due to the accelerated adverse changes in the trend of global warming.

Carbon Footprint vs. Carbon Tax

As part of efforts to limit carbon footprint, high polluters are made to pay or to take responsibility for their actions, while seeking ways to put a permanent end to emissions. One of such ways is to impose a tax on the carbon content of fossil fuels emitted by carbon-based firms and industries, a situation described as carbon tax. Such taxes are aimed at compelling firms to seek more energy efficient industrial systems. 

While companies pay carbon tax, the consumer is made to bear the eventual cost by purchasing finished products such as electricity, transport services, etc. As companies move to more energy efficient technologies, it is hoped that this would also affect the prices of finished products positively and entice carbon-based firms to steer away from fossil fuels.

In a double advantage, funds from carbon tax is used to finance more energy efficient projects such as wind turbines for electricity, solar technologies and battery-powered automobiles, etc. Clearly, the aim is to fight climate change by reducing emissions. Highlighting this in stories will encourage consumers to patronise industries known for going green, and to personally reduce or avoid their own emissions in burning forests, or in using cooking gas, for instance. In contrast, consumers would be encouraged to use solar systems, reduce meet consumption, use public transport, and invest in green energy technologies. 

In all, the media should constantly portray the health implications of carbon emissions such as heat waves, which have killed scores around the world this year alone, e.g., India. There are also economic impacts that occur when extreme weather events destroy lives and property. The high costs of fuel, water, food and electricity in Nigeria, though often directly related to inefficient government policies, are also a result of low public and private investment in alternative energy sources. The health and economic impacts of carbon emissions create inequalities in societies that make low-income earners to feel the worst consequences of extreme events and high cost of living. This often results in social instability caused by insecurity, rising crime rate, internal migration and conflicts as witnessed in many developing countries.

Of course, the media must showcase positive efforts being made to tackle climate change and to efface deeply-etched carbon footprints. This is to encourage the world that the end of humanity is not imminent. Only a few days ago this June, the US announced plans to implement a technology that will directly cool the planet. Advances in wind and solar electricity, battery powered cars are also reviving hope that humans can effectively push back on the forces of climate change by closing carbon footprints.

Table 1: Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Countries (rounded to millions of metric tons)

Reporting Carbon Footprint: Government Doublespeak vs. Media Complicity 

World leaders often indicate readiness to take action, yet in reality, they do very little, and instead continue industrial actions that foul the environment, especially among China and the US, which together have a carbon footprint that is nearly half of the entire global emissions (Table 1).  It is this situation that prompted a reaction by an online writer: 

There are many political, economic, cultural and technological issues around climate change, which are overshadowing the fact that climate change is a global environmental threat. The overriding issues are: whether or not climate change is occurring, if it is mostly caused by human action, how best to fight it, whether alternative sources of energy would eventually replace fossil fuel, what is the position of some countries on climate change, how strong is the link between greenhouse gases and environmental pollution, will the fight against climate change bring economic prosperity or otherwise? Is climate change fact or fantasy?

READ ALSO: Experts Highlight Ways Africa Can Participate In Energy Transition For Sustainability

The worrying trend is that in the guise of presenting all the sides to the news, the media continue to give undue attention to these issues, thereby stoking climate skepticism, and diverting attention from the environmental threat posed by climate change, and giving breathers to countries with the worst carbon footprint. This has led to accusations against the media about being induced by the ‘carbon club’, which are essentially lobby groups funded by heavy carbon industries to control media narratives about carbon-based industries. One writer noted the following about a report in a Nigerian newspaper:

One story in the Nigerian Thisday newspaper, Thursday, September 2, 2010, p.34, raised questions about the truth of climate change. The story (titled Climate change: UN welcomes independent preview) had every guise of the handiwork of climate change doubters. The fact that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was summoned by the UN, which demanded a review of the IPCC report (as a result of alleged mistakes), could call up questions in the mind of readers. The said IPCC report was the 2007 landmark fourth assessment report, which found the warming of climate outpacing natural variability, propelled principally by human activity. The question could have been: if the IPCC makes such errors (as the UN alleged), how are we sure that climate change is really occurring, and a result of human actions? But the IPCC insisted that the glaciers were melting, and the greenhouse gas link remained ever strong.

The same story also appeared in the Nigerian Vanguard newspaper, Tuesday, May 18, 2010, p.34, (with the headline: Review of inter-governmental panel on climate change begins). But it was written in a way that did not call human-induced climate change into question. The Thisday story, in contrast, reported that the credibility of IPCC came into question after ―revelation that the report contained some mistakes including over the rate of Himalayan glacier melt. It appeared that the credibility in question was all about the truth of climate change.

It was likely too that the reporter [in Thisday] did not see the angle of climate scepticism to the story. If they did, they would have sought expert views outside the UN in the story to strengthen the belief or non-belief in the truth of human-induced climate change. The quotes in the story, instead, were within the confines of UN officials‘ statements, one of which was that the IPCC should strengthen its procedures to handle ever-larger and increasingly complex climate assessments as well as the more intense public scrutiny coming from a world grappling with how best to respond to climate change – Robbert Dijkgraaf, co-chair of the InterAcademy Council (IAC) and head of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Science. Again, the question is: what does Robbert mean by: increasingly complex climate assessments, and more intense public scrutiny‘? Perhaps he wanted the readers to see climate change as difficult to understand and to believe that the public was scrutinizing information about the truth of (IPCC‘s report on) climate change.

Some climate experts have therefore regretted that carbon sceptics entice journalists to dodge from constantly portraying carbon as a major polluter. In 1998, the New York Times uncovered the efforts of opponents of international climate policy, who put together a plan with a US$600,000 budget to recruit scientists “who share the industry’s views of climate science and to train them in public relations so they can help convince journalists, politicians, and the public that the risk of global warming is too uncertain to justify controls on greenhouse gases…” 

Studies show that such covert lobby groups have worked very well to conceal the relationship between global resource hegemony, climate skepticism and media coverage of carbon footprints. In doing this, they try to foster conflicts of opinion among climate scientists, policy makers and the media, leading to delayed action towards meeting CO2 emissions targets. Several studies have reported inconsistencies, inaccuracies, contradictions and significant misreporting of carbon as a polluter as well as the risk-responsibility divide.

READ ALSO: Carbon Footprints And The African Narratives

Political office holders like President Obama in 2009 even feared backlash from influential industries while making commitments on carbon cuts. At times, the backyard influence on the media show when negative predictions about emission cut target prove true after United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Media reports generally indicate the heavy influence of powerful countries such as in 2009 when the US singlehandedly led the path to a deal from the Copenhagen UNFCCC just to avoid a binding treaty at the time. 

The media (Al Jazeera in 2010) at various times tried to emphasize that the objectives of certain green energy technologies such as wind-driven electric power is not essentially because of the fight against climate change. In 2012, the CNN gave vent to a term, climate shift, and projected that the term was likely to become more prominent than climate change. It was an effort to delink Hurricane Sandy of that year from ongoing issues on the effects of climate change. In The Guardian, Tuesday October 19, 2010, the Ethiopia Prime Minister, Zenawi Meles summarized the attitude of developed nations: ―The political leaders are not ready to take risks on climate change issues. You have all sorts of strange opinions among the most advanced countries of the world. Their basic interests thrive in an atmosphere of parochialism.

There is therefore a politicized intersection of carbon footprints, international discourses on climate change and national government policies. Media coverage is located somewhere in the intersection. Many countries see the United Nations as a subterfuge for economic control of the rest of the world by the global powers. That is, the move towards green energy is a heavily politicized arena in which developed societies such as the US and the EU are accused of trying to seize key economic advantages in the production and manufacturing of green technologies. This has affected the commitments of major carbon polluters like China and Russia as well as the trust of developing economies like Nigeria in terms of limiting their growing carbon footprints, and in taking local measures towards embracing energy efficient tools and industries. 

What the Media Must Do

If global warming must stay within 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, it means that carbon emissions should be constantly coming down to the extent of reaching half the level of the contemporary emissions by 2023. We are far from this. The expectations are that global temperature rise must stay below 2°C or even 1.5°C. Since the 2015 Paris UNFCCC when these expectations where agreed, nations have not done enough to put the world on the path to achieving this. 

This should be the crux of media coverage of carbon footprint, especially in light of the crucial and, at times, adversely complicit, role they (the media) play in reporting climate change in general and carbon footprint in particular. As noted by climate experts, the media must refrain from being subjective about the climate change images they portray in a bid to protect parochial interests. If climate change is defining the new century in terms of environmental threats, then there is a need to forge a global front in the fight against atmospheric risks posed by carbon dioxide emissions. 

READ ALSO: How Africa Can Benefit From Energy Transition, Green Economy – Aniagolu-Okoye

The media must focus attention on the world’s energy, industry, transport, food, agriculture and forestry systems to follow trends therein. Promises of finance flows must be monitored both to ensure that pledges are redeemed and that the needed thresholds to limit global warming are achieved. The media must also encourage developing countries to show commitment in formulating and implementing adaptation plans so as to benefit from climate finance. 

It is also not enough to appear as a climate weeping boy, always crying about the effects of climate change and begging for aid. Developing nations must contribute to global efforts to limit emissions and develop clean energy solutions.  This implies efforts to meet the 2020 disaster risk reduction target. In 2019, about 120 developing countries agreed to embark on, and enforce National Adaptation Plans that would boost climate adaptation and resilience. 

The following provides further guides in reporting carbon footprint.

• As an integral part of science reporting, carbon footprint reporting needs specializing reporters, who will update themselves from time to time.

• Reporters must understand the limits of journalistic ethics and practices such as reporting both sides, fairness and objective reporting. Carbon-based industries have hidden behind these media norms to encourage journalists to report inaccuracies, which compete with or confound the truth about carbon footprints.

1. 1. Reporters must understand the operations, and antics of carbon-based industries, which are usually powerful enough to sway the course of reporting on carbon footprint in terms of content, theme, and story direction.

• As a result, reporters must understand the interests of key carbon-based industries, their stance on carbon policies, and their attempt to project climate contrarianism

1. Apart from hard news, other genres such as feature and opinion must be used prominently and significantly to report carbon footprint. This is to enable expert analysis that resolves controversies and projects the facts.
2. The reporter should build a solid information base to draw from when reporting hard news stories on carbon footprint. Public opinion surveys, and established local sources should be cultivated to get local views on carbon footprint. 
3. Reporters should be on the guard against the interests of climate club and contrarians, and ensure that they ask them the right questions to counter their views against limiting carbon footprints or seeing carbon as a major polluter.

This implies an understanding of the convergences and divergences between carbon-based industries, climate science, politicians and goals of the media.  This means that the reporter must understand the larger frameworks, political constraints, economic factors, cultural, and regional differences that propel global discourses on carbon footprint. Media representations are driven mainly by these frameworks, which affect public understanding in the end. 

Journalists trained as science reporters must therefore reconsider as norms such as ‘objectivity’, ‘neutrality’, ‘impartiality’ and ‘balance’ when handling issues about carbon footprint. Reporters should be able to check the soundness of the claims by news sources, and avoid giving too much prominence to the views of the minority. They should thus avoid trading needless debates and controversies on scientific consensus such as the place of deep carbon footprints in global warming. For instance, at the 2023 UNFCCC in Dubai carbon was unanimously declared as causing 80% of global warming.

Conclusion

The closing stage of the Conference of Parties (COP 28) at the 2023 UNFCCC witnessed a final declaration on “transitioning away from fossil fuels”. It was a heartwarming declaration because countries such as the US, which championed climate contrarianism in the past, were at the forefront of the declaration. On December 12, there was a prior declaration urging countries to reduce “consumption and production of fossil fuels, in a just, orderly and equitable manner.” This was considered inadequate, and later replaced on the final day with the declaration on moving away from fossil fuel.

The media must take note of the transition from opposition (by major polluting countries) to support efforts at curbing carbon emissions. At least 197 countries and the European Union (EU) were represented at COP 28, with 85,000 participants reaching a compromise. In reporting this, the media make reference to former global discussions and agreements. For instance, at the end of COP 28 in Dubai, the following were reached, and the media must continue to highlight them and to ask the authorities questions about commitments to fulfiling them:

1. The creation of a “loss and damage” fund to support vulnerable countries during periods of climate disasters.
2. Fifty (50) oil companies committed to achieving “zero” methane emissions from their operations by 2030. Though recognized as a sign of a welcome awakening, the UN still called it insufficient.
3. On December 2023, 134 countries signed a declaration pledging to confront the impacts of climate change on food industry. It is said that these countries account for 5.7 billion of the global population, 70% of the food consumed and 76% of carbon emissions produced by the global food system. However, the declaration does not say anything about clear, measurable targets in these areas. There is also a marked omission of methane emission from animal production. 

Indeed the time for action is long overdue. The UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell, on December 6, 2023, said: “We need highest ambition, not point-scoring or lowest common denominator politics. Good intentions won’t halve emissions this decade or save lives right now” Similarly speaking on the same day, Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former UN Climate Envoy, urged: “A successful Cop 28 is not about a single individual or nation, but the collective will and concerted efforts of all countries in these negotiations. The science compels: phase out fossil fuels rapidly, accelerate renewable energy, and radically scale up finance.” This is also a wakeup call to the media.

Dr Mbamalu, a Jefferson Fellow and Member of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE), is a Publisher and Communications/Media Consultant. His extensive research works on Renewable Energy and Health  Communication are published in several international journals, including SAGE.

SMS/Whatsapp: 08094000017

Follow on X: @marcelmbamalu

MARCEL MBAMALU

+ posts

Dr. Marcel Mbamalu is a communication scholar, journalist and entrepreneur. He holds a Ph.D in Mass Communication from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka and is the Chief Executive Officer Newstide Publications, the publishers of Prime Business Africa.

A seasoned journalist, he horned his journalism skills at The Guardian Newspaper, rising to the position of News Editor at the flagship of the Nigerian press. He has garnered multidisciplinary experience in marketing communication, public relations and media research, helping clients to deliver bespoke campaigns within Nigeria and across Africa.

He has built an expansive network in the media and has served as a media trainer for World Health Organisation (WHO) at various times in Northeast Nigeria. He has attended numerous media trainings, including the Bloomberg Financial Journalism Training and Reuters/AfDB training on Effective Coverage of Infrastructural Development of Africa.

A versatile media expert, he won the Jefferson Fellowship in 2023 as the sole Africa representative on the program. Dr Mbamalu was part of a global media team that covered the 2020 United State’s Presidential election. As Africa's sole representative in the 2023 Jefferson Fellowships, Dr Mbamalu was selected to tour the United States and Asia (Japan and Hong Kong) as part of a 12-man global team of journalists on a travel grant to report on inclusion, income gaps and migration issues between the US and Asia.

• Latest UNILAG Inaugural Lecture Makes History; But Why?
• Reuben Abati: When Journalists Become Agents Of Ethnic Division
• Public Stop-and-Search By Security Agencies: Why DSS, Police And Others Must Adopt Modern Checks
• The Great Betrayal: How Global Leaders Continue To Undermine Africa