‘The international goal to limit global heating to 1.5°C (2.7°F) is officially on life support. A United Nations-backed panel of climate scientists warned in a new report released Monday that the world may be on track to warm by more than 3°C– twice the Paris Agreement target– in a change that would painfully remake societies and life on the planet.’ An excerpt from a recently Bloomberg-published article ‘Planet’s breakneck warming likely to pass 1.5°C, UN scientists warn’
The latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), according to the Report, is ‘The Working Group III (WG III) contribution to the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) [and] assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change.’ According to the report, the window of opportunity to restrain global average temperature to below 1.5°C is fast closing. In fact, the same Bloomberg article highlighted that one of the main architects is rather not that optimistic that this goal could be met, given the slow progress of steps that need to be taken.
According to the article ‘The Paris Agreement in 2015 established a 1.5°C goal as a rallying point for every nation in the world, and the Costa Rican diplomatChristiana Figueres was one of its chief architects. With the release of Monday’s latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, she’s faced with the increasingly probable outcome that the temperature threshold she helped establish as former executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change will be passed in the years ahead. “I don’t have words to explain. ‘Concerning’ is not enough. This is frankly a terrifying report,” Figueres told Bloomberg Green… “It’s not really about megatons,” she said, speaking of rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions. “It is fundamentally about the long-term wellbeing of the entire web of life on this planet.”’
Moreover, while the war in Ukraine takes away from focusing on issues that poses the threat of an existential nature, it also pushes countries to move away from fossil fuel reliance to renewable sources of energy.
And yet if one looks around the world, there is not much effort globally that is going through, especially given the move towards camp-politics apparently, in an overall heating up of the situation in terms of cold war between the USA and China. A February 11 Project Syndicate (PS)-published article ‘Climate accountability now’ highlighted the lack of effort with regard to dealing with climate change as follows: ‘At COP26 in Glasgow last November, there was some progress toward strengthening the 2015 Paris climate agreement’s nationally determined contributions to emissions reduction, closing the gap in financing for climate adaptation, and ending the use of coal. But these advances were nowhere close to sufficient, given the existential threat posed by rising emissions and temperatures. That is why 2022 must be the year of accountability, with all major emitters delivering on the promises of the so-called Glasgow Climate Pact. …In concrete terms, those who still have not set Paris-aligned 2030 targets should do so by COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh this November. While all countries must fast-track implementation of their new commitments, it is particularly important that wealthy G20 economies do so, because they are responsible for most global emissions.’
Moreover, while the war in Ukraine takes away from focusing on issues that poses the threat of an existential nature, it also pushes countries to move away from fossil fuel reliance to renewable sources of energy. A March 29 PS-published article ‘Replace Russian oil and gas with renewables’ pointed out in this regard ‘The United States recently announced an immediate ban on imports of Russian oil and gas, while the United Kingdom and the European Union pledged to curb them more gradually. The rationale is clear: punish Russia, reduce its leverage, and restore peace to Ukraine. But wrong choices now– specifically, continuing to favour fossil fuels over renewable energy– could lock in a far less peaceful future. …The West’s rejection of Russian oil and gas creates an opportunity to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels. …renewable alternatives like solar and wind power make economic sense. They are far quicker and safer to install than nuclear plants or most of the fossil-fuel alternatives being discussed.’
The impact of climate change is already alarming, especially for poor countries, whereby according to a recent International Monetary Fund (IMF)-published article ‘Poor and vulnerable countries need support to adapt to climate change’ it was pointed out ‘The international community can help poor and vulnerable countries adapt by providing financial support and developing institutional capacity. These countries will suffer the most devastating impacts of climate change even though they’re not responsible for causing it. It’s also in the world’s interest to ensure climate change does not jeopardize development and stability in poorer countries. Investing in climate resilience can also be financially efficient for development partners because up-front investment in protection can be less expensive than humanitarian relief and reconstruction after a disaster.’
