[ad_1]
Copyright of the image
Getty Images
According to scientists, this is the latest warning about the risks of rising temperatures around the world.
Their dramatic report on keeping the rise below 1.5 ° C indicates that the world is now completely behind, moving towards 3C instead.
To stay below 1.5 ° C will require "rapid, profound and unprecedented change in all aspects of society".
The report will be very expensive, but the window of opportunity is not yet closed.
After three years of research and a week of bargaining between scientists and government officials at a meeting in South Korea, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report special report on the impact of global warming of 1.5 ° C.
The 33-page critical summary for policymakers is likely to be the culmination of difficult negotiations between climate scientists committed to their studies and political representatives more concerned with economies and living standards.
Despite inevitable compromises, some key messages are clearly expressed.
"The first is that limiting warming to 1.5 ° C brings a lot of benefits compared to limiting it to 2 degrees.It really reduces the impacts of climate change in a very important way," said Professor Jim Skea , co-chair of the IPCC.
"The second is the unprecedented nature of the changes needed if we want to limit warming to 1.5 ° C – changes in energy systems, changes in our land management, changes in how we move with transportation . "
What is the big delivery?
"Scientists may want to write in capital letters," ACT NOW, but they have to say it with facts and figures, "said Kaisa Kosonen of Greenpeace, an observer at the negotiations. "And they did it."
The researchers used these facts and figures to paint a picture of the world characterized by a dangerous fever, caused by man. We used to think that if we could continue to heat below 2 degrees this century, the changes we would experience would be manageable.
Not anymore. According to this new study, going beyond 1.5 ° C does not take into account the quality of life of the planet. And the "railing" at a temperature of 1.5 ° C could be exceeded in just 12 years in 2030.
We can stay underneath, but that will require urgent and large-scale changes on the part of governments and individuals. In addition, we will have to invest a huge amount of cash every year, around 2.5% of global GDP, for two decades.
Even in this case, we will still need machines, trees and plants to capture the carbon from the air that we can then store in the depths of the earth. Forever!
Sorry, your browser can not display this map.
Five steps for 1.5
- Global CO2 emissions are expected to decrease by 45% from 2010 levels by 2030.
- Renewable energies are expected to provide up to 85% of global electricity by 2050.
- Coal should be reduced to zero.
- Up to 7 million km2 of land will be needed for energy crops (a little less than the size of Australia).
- Net global net issuance by 2050.
How much will it cost?
It will not be cheap. The report says that to limit warming to 1.5 ° C will require "average annual investment needs of about $ 2.4 trillion in the energy system" between 2016 and 2035.
Experts believe that this number needs to be contextualized.
"We have to weigh the costs and benefits," said Dr. Stephen Cornelius, a former IPCC negotiator at WWF, who said that reducing emissions in the short term would cost money, but would be cheaper than reducing the costs. Remove carbon dioxide. later this century.
"The report also speaks of benefits, as economic growth is above 1.5 ° C and 2 ° C, and the risk of catastrophic impact at 1.5 n is not higher than that at 2 ".
What happens if we do not act?
Researchers say that if we fail to maintain temperatures below 1.5 ° C, we will experience significant and dangerous changes in our world.
You can kiss the coral reefs goodbye, as the report says that they would be essentially 100% annihilated at 2 degrees of warming.
Important climate report calls for rapid and profound change
The sea level will increase by about 10 centimeters more if we allow the warming to warm up to 2 ° C. This may seem trivial, but staying at 1.5 ° C means that 10 million fewer people would be at risk. flooding.
There are also significant impacts on the temperature and acidity of the oceans, as well as on the ability to grow crops such as rice, corn and wheat.
"We are already in the danger zone to a degree of warming," said Kaisa Kosonen of Greenpeace.
"The two poles are melting at an accelerated pace, age-old trees that have been there for hundreds of years are dying, and the summer we've just been living – the whole world was on fire, basically."
Is this plan feasible?
It depends on what you want to say. IPCC scientists are not allowed to prescribe what should be done; they can only define the options. But the people involved in this study think that it shows realistic tracks for staying below 1.5 ° C.
"It's feasible if we put all our best footing, and that's a key message of this report." No one can retreat any more, "said Dr. Debra Roberts, IPCC Co-Chair.
"We must all radically change the way we live, we can not stay away from the problem."
"The report is very clear, it can be done, but it will require profound social and political changes as well as technological advances."
Analysis of David Shukman, Scientific Editor of the BBC
The countdown to the worst global warming seems to be accelerated. Seriously damaging impacts are no longer on a distant horizon later in this century, but in a time frame that seems too close.
Similarly, the report's "ways" to control temperatures mean that difficult decisions can not be delayed – abandonment of fossil fuels by the middle of the century, coal abandoned much earlier than previously suggested, with vast tracts of land forest data.
It's breathtaking and some will say that it's unrealistic, the fantasy of a climatologist. So, is that plausible? On the one hand, the global economy relies on carbon and its key activities depend on it; On the other hand, prices for wind turbines and solar panels have dropped and more and more countries and states like California are setting ambitious green goals.
In the end, politicians will have to face a difficult choice: to persuade their constituents that the revolutionary change described in the report is urgent, or to ignore it and say that scientists have been wrong.
Does all this concern the safeguarding of small island states?
The idea of keeping the global temperature rise at 1.5% is a thing of great concern to small and low-lying island states who fear being flooded with floods if temperatures reach 2 degrees.
But over the three years of the report's preparation, more and more scientific evidence has been released showing that the benefits of staying close to 1.5 ° C are not unique to the Pacific Island countries.
"If you save a small island country, you save the world," said Dr. Amjad Abdulla, author of the IPCC of the Maldives. "Because the report makes it clear that no one will be safe – it's all about morality, it's about humanity."
How long do we have?
Not long at all. But this question is now in the hands of political leaders. The report states that difficult decisions can no longer be canceled. If the countries of the world do not act quickly, they will have to rely even more on untested technologies to remove carbon from the air – an expensive and uncertain road.
"They really have to start working immediately, and the report makes it clear that if governments fulfill the commitments made in the 2030 Paris Agreement, that is not enough, and it will make it very difficult to take climate change into account. , 5 ° C, "said Professor Jim Skea.
"If they read the report and decide to increase their ambitions and act more immediately, then 1.5 ° C remains at hand – that's the nature of the choice they make. are faced."
Activists and environmentalists, who welcomed the report, said that there was simply no time left for debate.
"This is the moment when we have to decide," said Kaisa Kosonen.
"We want to move to clean energy and sustainable lifestyles, we want to protect our forests and our species, it's the moment we'll remember, it's the year of the turning point." . "
What can I do?
The report states that four major global systems – energy, land use, cities and industry – are undergoing rapid and significant change.
"This is not remote science, but where we live and work, and it tells us how we could contribute to this dramatic change," said Dr. Debra Roberts, Co-Chair. IPCC. .
"You could say you do not have control of land use, but you have control over what you eat and determines land use.
"We can choose how we move in cities and if we do not have access to public transport, make sure to elect politicians who offer options around public transportation."
