Two reports were released last week about the ongoing failure to meet targets for reducing emissions.

The first came from Ireland’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and documented the shortfall against the Government’s ambitious targets.

The EPA report has to be classified as old news – it has been evident for years that the Irish targets would not be met and experts were expressing doubts about their realism when they were first enshrined in the policy framework.

The report reaffirms that Ireland is also way behind on its commitments under the EU’s Effort Sharing Directive, which entails the risk of penalties.

Like many other contingent liabilities, this has not been provided for in exchequer projections.

The second, from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), a unit of the United Nations, is far more important.

It concludes that emissions containment for the world as a whole is way behind target too, and that the risk of global warming continues to rise.

The reason the WMO report should be the bigger worry is simple: Ireland is not a planet and even a massive over-achievement of national targets in a small country makes a trivial contribution to worldwide emissions.

If the planet faces damage from global warming, so does each of the states which perforce share the common climate. Almost 20 years ago, the UK government published the report of economist Nicholas Stern into the economics of global warming.

Stern cautioned that the threat was an enormous externality, meaning that the damage done by consumption of fossil fuels, or of any goods or services whose creation entailed high emissions, would impose damage on others, including other countries which share the planet.

Who are the heavy hitters?

There are 200 independent states in the world free to pursue distinct policies which they have failed to align.

An exception is the European Union, a confederation of 27 states and 450 million people, jointly responsible for a smaller portion of world emissions than the US with 110 million fewer and the EU has a common approach to reducing emissions.

Per capita emissions in the US reflect not just high living standards – petrol costs around 84 cents per litre, diesel a few cents more, but both are around double the retail price in many European countries and due largely to low taxes in America. It is remarkable that the price of ‘gas at the pump’ played a prominent role in the US presidential election last November.

China, with a record of rapid growth in recent decades and 1.4 billion people, is the world’s largest emitter, followed by the US with Europe a long way behind.

The fastest-growing large economy, and a possible successor to China, is India, also with a population of 1.4 billion and, for now, lower per capita emissions.

The question posed by the WMO’s gloomy outlook is the following: what should small countries do when their own efforts at emissions reduction are far too small to offset the actions of the big emitters, all sovereign and independent?

Ireland is responsible for 1t of worldwide emissions out of about 800.

Even the EU counts for less than one might imagine – the relative success of European policy has reduced Europe’s share to the point where the full attainment of EU targets would be swamped by failure elsewhere.

Policy in the US has now moved sharply away from prioritising emissions reduction, with formal withdrawal from the Paris accords (the voluntary international agreement to limit emissions), the withdrawal by US President Trump of state aid to renewables and the prominence of climate change denial in his entourage. The US adoption of renewable generation technologies has diminished and trade sanctions on Canada will hinder imports of low-carbon power from that country.

Ireland’s stance

Ireland will adhere to whatever EU policy emerges for the longer term, but will struggle to get back on track.

The cancellation by experienced operators of the only Atlantic offshore wind project in waters off Connemara, despite Government price guarantees, is ominous.

Remember the exaggerated talk about the west coast as ‘the Saudi Arabia of wind?’ The EU policy may in any event prove to be insufficient unless the US and other large emitters accelerate their efforts.

Last week the Swiss village of Blatten, close to the Italian border, was wiped out as a glacier collapsed.

Further glacier failures are now regarded as inevitable by climate scientists and the Swiss authorities evacuated the 300 villagers in good time.

This is an example of adaptation rather than mitigation as a response to climate change – accept that it is going to happen and take action to minimise the damage.

Glacier collapse is not a threat in Ireland, unlike coastal erosion and the flooding of inland towns and villages.

If further attempts at mitigation are pointless, is it time to focus on adaptation instead?