The Climate Crisis Cannot Be Solved in the Market!

The last ice age of the earth ended 11,700 years ago. The era that followed and the one we are in is called the Holocene Era. Humans have so damaged nature that a need arose to give a name to the era that has changed under human influence.

In 2000, biologist Eugene Stormer and chemist Paul Crutzen proposed calling the period in which humans are changing the balance of nature the Anthropocene.

The international organization called the Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), which defines and names the stages of the Earth, thinks that we have entered the Anthropocene Age. The Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) is also conducting research on this subject. The studies focus on which year the Anthropocene Age should begin. The suggestions point to different dates. The beginning of the industrial revolutions, the years 1945 and 1950, are being considered.

Humans have reached the point where they will change the balance of nature outside of the natural movement. Before nature has a chance to renew itself, increasing populations and growing economies come into play again and again with increasing consumption. The result is a destroyed nature and a climate crisis. The cause of this crisis is the economic order established by humans.

The highest temperatures ever recorded since air temperatures began to be officially measured have been scorching various parts of the world for weeks.

The hottest June in history has been experienced. Europe is experiencing temperatures reaching 48.80C, with deaths due to heat waves. In the US, Death Valley recorded a temperature of 53.90C. In China's Xinjiang Region, temperatures reached 52.20C.

The world will not experience a heat wave for the first time in 2023. However, the duration of heat waves is increasing. For example, the annual heat waves in the 50 most populous cities in the United States have increased by 49 days compared to 1960 .

Almost all scientists who study climate and climate-related natural sciences have determined that there is a climate crisis and that the cause of it is humans.

Along with the climate crisis, the climate cycle called El Nino also has an effect on extreme heat in 2023. However, the climate crisis intensifies the effect of this natural cycle that increases temperatures. Thus, unprecedented temperatures occur during the period when data measurements are made regularly. 2023 is a year in which all data on climate change show major deviations from averages.

The above data are the results that natural sciences have presented to us. The economic order is responsible for this. The use of fossil-based energy resources, which is of great importance in the survival of this economic order, is among the main reasons for this result.

Giant fossil-based energy companies spent $1 billion on lobbying efforts to misinform the public after the climate agreement was signed in Paris in 2015 and came into effect in 2016.

BP had said it would reduce fossil-based energy emissions that warm the Earth by 35% by 2030. It has lowered this target to 20-30%. ExxonMobil has ended its energy production project using algae . Shell announced that it has stopped investing in renewable energy sources.

Shell had stated that it would reduce its fossil-based energy production by 20% by 2030. But how? By selling 20% of the company's production to another company . Therefore, the fossil-based fuel released into the atmosphere only changed hands. What a deception!

Total has announced that it will continue to invest in fossil-based energy sources without slowing down.

One by one, the oil giants are reneging on even their modest promises of renewable energy investment.

In addition to the fact that the oil industry giants’ investments in renewable energy are extremely inadequate, some investment funds also fund the oil giants. However, the main problem here is not that they provide funding.

Investment funds establish funds with green or social responsibility names. The aim is declared as investing in green energy and companies that benefit society. For this purpose, they list the funds in question with the abbreviation ESG (Environment, Social, Governance). However, they invest in fossil-based energy producing companies with the ESG abbreviation. In other words, they appear to invest in green and renewable energy companies and deceive investors who invest in these funds. This is called “greenwashing” in English.

Overcoming the current crisis requires an effort that will take a very long time. However, although the climate crisis has been known by the oil sector for almost 70 years , the point reached is not encouraging at all. There is a 70-year-old story of the sector providing misleading information to the public.

It is not possible to expect the climate crisis to be solved under market conditions. The world, shaped by the market fetishist views of economists such as Hayek and Friedman, has serious problems. These problems are no longer surmountable through state-controlled market controls. Decades of experience point to this observation.

It is possible to make a prediction with the results of numerous readings and researches. With the heavy costs that will be experienced for the unsuccessful steps taken to prevent the climate crisis, the solution may one day go beyond the free market economy. Within the framework of the current economic understanding, the problem of insufficiency of resources, especially water, may progress to a point where economic choices cannot be left to households and companies.

There is a field in economics called environmental economics. When you are interested in this field, you see that there are those who seek solutions in the free market and in ecosocialism . When you understand that those who pay the price of the climate crisis are disadvantaged social groups and countries, you can also understand that the issue has a class dimension .

Short-term profits are pushing the importance of a costly issue into the background. While oil giants multiply their profits through lobbying activities, they will be watching from afar as the consequences of the climate crisis are experienced by low-income groups, poor countries, and marginalized social groups. As has been the case so far.

A process that harms humanity is at work in the design of the current economic order. Very few people and companies benefit from this order.

The climate crisis is the product of capitalism, even in newspapers like the Financial Times, and it is being said that economics education needs to be taught with a different approach. In his column in The New York Times, Paul Krugman explains that the climate crisis is an issue that needs to be politicized, and he is not an environmental economist.

In short, the solution lies not in the market, but in the states. However, considering that the last 27 COP meetings have been fruitless , hopes are diminishing.

When we remember that COP28 will be chaired by Sultan al-Jeber, the head of the United Arab Emirates' state oil company Adnoc, and that Adnoc recently announced that it would double its daily oil production, it becomes even clearer that this issue can no longer be resolved under market conditions.

It seems that states will have to get serious under necessity and public pressure. Seriousness beyond a certain threshold may mean regime changes. This possibility is increasing. People do not understand evil unless they experience it.