The crucial climate summit: Here’s what’s at stake at Cop26 | policeman 26

[ad_1]

The COP26 conference may feature dozens of world leaders, cost billions of pounds, generate a lot of technical jargon and be seen as the last chance to prevent catastrophic global warming, but at its simplest, the Glasgow climate conference is a debate over the phone call or reduce risks.

telephonic call

1.1 c

The global temperature has already risen by about 1.1°C since the Industrial Revolution. Even at this level, delegates no longer need to read scientific studies to understand how 200 years of emissions, exhaust fumes, and burning trees have destabilized the climate. All they have to do is look out the window or read the latest local and international news. The host city, Glasgow, experienced a sweltering heat during its hottest summer on record. Globally, in the summer of 2021, there were record temperatures, fires and floods all over the world, killing hundreds in the northwest Americas, suffocating vast swaths of Siberia, inundating cities in Germany and inundating subway passengers in China.

The heat continued into the fall. At least four countries experienced the warmest October days on record: Iran (46°C), Morocco (43.5°C), China (38.9°C) and South Korea (32.3°C). This is not a one time. As with the human body, the difference between a healthy temperature and a planetary fever can be less than 1°C. The past 10 years have been the hottest decades on Earth since measurements began. Even at the current level, the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, has declared it a “red symbol of humanity”. But it’s too late to stop at that level because additional warming has already gone into the system.

1.5°C to 2°C

Cop26’s primary goal is to push the world as low as possible within this target range, which was established under the Paris Agreement. 1.5°C is considered the safest climatic drop zone that humanity may still reach. A half-degree slip would greatly increase the risks, according to the world’s leading climate scientists at the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Their computer models suggest that another 420 million people would be exposed to more frequent heat waves and that heat-related deaths would rise twice as fast if temperatures reached 2°C instead of 1.5°C.

This half of the degree means more climate-related water stress, hunger and poverty, particularly in the poorer parts of the world. In the Sahel, the Amazon, South Africa, Central Europe and the Mediterranean, risks to food security would be categorized as “high” rather than “medium”. In Southern Africa and the Mediterranean, the potential for severe drought will be high, while economic growth will take a bigger hit, especially in Africa, India, Southeast Asia, Brazil and Mexico.

People gather around a cistern for a potable water supply in Latur, India. Photo: Satish Bhatt/Getty Images

Other Earthlings would suffer a lot more with half a degree less room to breathe. At 2°C, 18% of insect species, 16% of plants and 8% of vertebrates would be expected to lose half of their habitats, at least twice the proportions at 1.5°C. This would put further pressure on food production, pollination, water quality, and other biological components of the planetary life support system.

The Amazon and other tropical rainforests would also have less chance of surviving. And the hotter, drier and more fragmented these ecosystems are, the greater the risk that they will degrade into dry savannas. At 2C, month-long warmth spells are expected to be more than 1.5°C, dry spells twice as long, and extremes three times longer.

For the world’s oceans, 2°C instead of 1.5°C means increased ocean acidification, oxygen depletion, and more dead zones. This would put pressure on fisheries and give corals little chance of survival.

Raising the temperature by half would make an ice-free Arctic summer 10 times more likely and expose up to 2.5 million square kilometers of permafrost to melting. By the end of this century, sea levels are likely to be at least 10cm higher than they were at 1.5°C, leaving 10.4 million people more vulnerable to flooding. Half a degree would raise the likelihood of a larger systemic risk, perhaps through a single massive event, such as the breakup of a major Antarctic glacier, or as a series of multiple tipping points. But instead of a ramp that humanity is dropping, 2C is likely to be just another rung on the port. In current trends, it will not be the last.

2C to 3C

The world is on track to become 2.7°C hotter, the United Nations calculated last month. This is “a major cause for concern,” said Patricia Espinosa, the United Nations’ chief climate negotiator. If nations lose faith in the Paris process and withdraw or back down, as the United States did briefly under Donald Trump and Brazil now does under Jair Bolsonaro, temperatures could easily creep past 3°C.

At this level of heating, the projected length of the average drought increases to 10 months, up from two months at 1.5°C, while the area burned by wildfires doubles. In Britain, the number of hot days will likely double and maximum temperatures will be close to 40 degrees Celsius. Add another half degree of global warming and an ice-free summer in the Arctic that is almost certain every year, while the risks of marine heat waves — which can devastate fish and crustacean populations — are likely to be 41 times higher than in the Arctic. pre-industrial era.

A person walking along a road in a drought-prone Madagascar region. Photo: Rijasolo/AFP/Getty Images

At 4°C, global heat excess deaths are likely to increase six times faster than at 1.5°C. Add another half a degree and the picture looks even more intimidating as two-thirds of plants, insects and invertebrates are likely to lose more than half their climate range, compared to about 6% at 1.5°C. Forests, wetlands, and other areas of abundant nature on the planet will be unrecognizable, as will many coastal areas, where sea levels will likely rise by more than a meter by the end of the century.

telephonic call

These risks can be reduced if governments increase Glasgow’s carbon reduction ambitions. “This is one of our most important policemen for a long time,” said Jennifer Morgan, Executive Director of Greenpeace. “At the most basic level, what is at stake is whether world leadership will treat the climate as an emergency as it is, and make a series of decisions to keep 1.5°C in sight.”

There was progress. Over the past two years, net-zero announcements from the UK, EU, US, Japan, South Korea and China have raised hopes. More than 100 countries have updated their plans, while others have continued to stream. This month, Turkey finally ratified the Paris Agreement and promised to raise its carbon dioxide level by 2035. Shortly before that, South Africa pledged to cut its 2030 emissions cap by a third.

The Carbon Tracker program counts all commitments and declarations through November 2020 and could limit global warming to 2.1°C if every country lives up to its pledges. With six of the top 10 emitting countries yet to reveal new plans, there is a chance this could approach 1.5°C in the coming weeks.

The world’s richest countries should take the lead. According to the World Resources Institute, actions by the G-20 alone could limit the temperature rise to 1.7°C.

For Bob Ward of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change Research, the wish list includes China’s emissions peaking five years early in 2025, and India setting a net-zero target for the middle of the century, with the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom setting strong near-term carbon targets. . Cuts and compensates for the $20 billion a year shortfall in climate finance support for poor countries. “The worst outcome would be for rich countries to be seen as an untrustworthy partner for developing countries, undermining all other parts of the negotiations and leading to serious doubts about whether the Paris Agreement will ever be implemented,” he said.

Protesters hold signs during a climate protest in Johannesburg in 2019. Photo: Denis Farrell/AP

Along with international solidarity, Glasgow will be a test of credibility. “What we are looking for in Glasgow is not more data and commitments, but credible plans that we can scrutinize,” said Chris Rablee, professor of climate sciences at University College London.

The UK and many other governments have been keeping vague promises since Paris, Rapley said. Other countries such as Brazil and Australia have either backed off or tried to manipulate their carbon accounts. “It’s been six years. The carbon budget has been burned despite the Covid lockdown. Now there is less time. It should be Cop26 as we move from promises to solid plans that will take us as close to 1.5°C as possible.”

Erosion caused by thawing permafrost tundra and disappearance of sea ice in the Yukon Delta in Alaska. Photo: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images

The best result would be a big deal – the Glasgow Accord – makes 1.5°C on the horizon. Worse would be unit breakdown which raises the possibility of temperatures rising beyond 3°C. Most likely something in between.

Laurie Mylvirta of the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air says a “realistic, successful outcome” will be concrete, traceable steps between now and 2025 to achieve net-zero targets, new commitments from countries such as India, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia that have not yet updated their NDCs, and a message It is clear from China, the United States, the European Union and Japan that the financial tap to coal projects has been turned off for good, while the cash channel for renewables will be opened more widely.

Public pressure will be crucial. Greenpeace’s Morgan said she was more upbeat than she was at the start of the year. “People are involved in all of this. Movements gather and regenerate and you start to see a reaction from politicians to that. There is a lot of positive energy… I think what we are going to get is a very strong showing of public support around the world for a more systemic transformation and leaders will feel intimidated and courageous because of That. But I don’t know if they’ll lean in and have the courage that this moment requires. It’s an incredible moment.”

Support urgent and independent climate journalism

[ad_2]