"Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said."
"Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said."Scientists want the world to reduce global warming drastically, to 1.5°C, instead of the previously agreed upon target set in 2015 of 2°C, a Herculean goal that by itself cannot be achieved.
So hitting 1.5°C in 12 years, the so-called no-bullsh*t global warming scenario, will require severe lifestyle changes.
Like banning all diesel cars—starting yesterday. Or Filipino farmers to stop planting rice because growing palay requires so much water and so much land that otherwise could be put to better, more environment-friendly, and more profitable, use. Or you and I to stop eating chicken now.
Did you know that it takes 2,500 liters of water to produce a kilo of rice? And 4,300 liters of water to produce a kilo of chicken meat?
Making those sacrifices is like asking for a miracle, like the parting of the Red Sea, ala Moses, or the second coming of Jesus Christ, ala Jesus Christ, of course.
But if you don’t endure those sacrifices, temperatures will rise and the oceans will rise and with those, half of Metro Manila and most parts of Luzon will be inundated by rising ocean waters.
Please note that at the rate countries, like the United States and China (both of whom account for half of the world’s pollution), are spewing carbon, the more realistic temperature rise will be 3°C. This 3°C global warming is what I call the Delubyo Scenario.
So do you want to stop eating rice and chicken and stop driving your diesel car? Or would you rather drown less than 30 years from now?
Fortunately for me, I would be gone by the time you realize what I am writing about is BS. Or not.
Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said on Monday, Oct. 8, 2018 in a new assessment, following a week-long meeting in South Korea of climate scientists and government representatives.
With clear benefits to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable society, the IPCC said.
IPCC’s Special Report on Global Warming highlights a number of climate change effects that could be avoided by limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C, or more.
For instance, by 2100, global sea level rise would be 10 cm lower with global warming of 1.5°C compared with 2°C.
The likelihood of an Arctic Ocean free of sea ice in summer would be once per century with global warming of 1.5°C, compared with at least once per decade with 2°C.
Coral reefs would decline by 70-90 percent with global warming of 1.5°C, whereas virtually all (> 99 percent) would be lost with 2°C.
The report finds that limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require “rapid and far-reaching” transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities.
Global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching “net zero” around 2050. This means that any remaining emissions would need to be balanced by removing CO2 from the air.
“Limiting warming to 1.5°C is possible within the laws of chemistry and physics but doing so would require unprecedented changes,” said Jim Skea, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group III.
Allowing the global temperature to temporarily exceed or ‘overshoot’ 1.5°C would mean a greater reliance on techniques that remove CO2 from the air to return global temperature to below 1.5°C by 2100. The effectiveness of such techniques are unproven at large scale and some may carry significant risks for sustainable development, the report notes.
The Conference of Parties, or the countries supposedly committed to reducing carbon emissions, had noted with concern that the estimated aggregate greenhouse gas emission levels in 2025 and 2020 resulting from the INDCs (Individually Determined National Contributions, or the commitments by each country to reduce carbon emissions by a certain deadline) do not fall within least-cost 2 ÌŠC scenarios.
Rather, current commitments by countries could lead to a projected level of 55 gigatons (Gt) in 2020.
The COP also noted that much greater emission reduction efforts will be required than those associated with the INDCs in order to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2 ÌŠC above pre-industrial levels by reducing emissions to 40 Gt or to 1.5 ÌŠC above pre-industrial levels by reducing to a level identified in the special IPCC report.
The New York Times said the “landmark report…paints a far more dire picture of the immediate consequences of climate change than previously thought and says that avoiding the damage requires transforming the world economy at a speed and scale that has ‘no documented historic precedent’.”
The Washington Post has warned that “the world has barely 10 years to get climate change under control.”
biznewsasia@gmail.com