You’ve likely heard of the latest IPCC Report dropping. It’s the final piece of the 6th Assessment report, and is essentially a summary of sorts of the previous pieces of this 6th Assessment cycle, laid bare in what has been dubbed a ‘how to guide’ on saving the planet from the climate crisis. They’ve taken over 8,500 pages in total and produced a much more concise document called the Synthesis Report, which has then been further boiled down to a Summary for Policy Makers (SPM), of which there’s a shorter version and a longer one. After a lengthy process of to-ing and fro-ing, this work has been signed off and endorsed by 195 countries – no small feat! There were 98 writers and editors and an additional 31 people on the scientific steering committee, just for the SPM. The total number involved in the 6th Assessment cycle is in the thousands. The crux of the matter is that there is still a chance to curb the worst potential disasters, but we have to act now before the window of opportunity closes. The Summary provides a firm–very firm–kick up the backside and some reasons for maintaining optimism. Here is a super helpful, easy to digest, balanced synopsis of the SPM.
The overarching, unavoidable, undeniable fact is, now hold onto your hats as this may shock you: human activities, predominantly those resulting in the release of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming. Take a moment. Who knew? The current warming is at 1.1° C above average temperatures in 1850-1900. Another hard, indisputable fact they remind us of is that “Human-caused climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. This has led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people.” Because the atmosphere, cryosphere, biosphere and the oceans are ALL impacted and have been exhibiting major and rapid changes. Ocean warming and acidification has seen food production from the seas diminish and we’ve seen mass mortality events.
3.3-3.6 billion people live in geographies which are highly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change. The IPCC point out the inequity within this. “Vulnerable communities who have historically contributed the least to current climate change are disproportionately affected.” Between 2010-2020 human mortality from floods, droughts and extreme storms was 15 times higher in vulnerable geographies than in areas with low climate vulnerability. Increasing extreme weather events have exposed millions of people to food and water scarcity, which has effected Indigenous Peoples, small-scale food producers and low-income households the most. We must all be unwavering in our flight for climate justice, not only climate action.
To look at this from the other angle, regarding emissions, only 35% of the world’s population live in countries where emissions are above 9 tons CO2e per capita; whereas 41% of humans live in countries which emit less than 3 tons CO2e per capita. Where can we attribute the emissions to? The largest share and growth in gross GHG emissions come straight from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes. 79% of global GHG emissions in 2019 came from energy, industry, transport and buildings.
The IPCC explains that we have a carbon budget, and if we are to halt warming at or around the 1.5°C mark we must not exceed this budget. This is great context, just like knowing how much you can spend on take-out per month to ensure you still have money for rent. At the start of 2020 this carbon budget was estimated at around 500 billion tons of emissions, which we can ‘spend’ if we wanted to have a 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. We have a budget of 1,150 billion tons if we’d like a 67% of staying under 2°C. However, if we continue to emit at the rate we did in 2019 (remember that the blip of reduced emissions in 2020 was just that, a blip, and we bounced back) for the rest of this decade we would almost exhaust the 500 billion ton budget, and we’d blow more than a third of the 1,150 billion ton budget…meaning we’re less likely to limit warming to under 2°C above pre-industrial levels. In fact, they project that using only existing fossil fuel infrastructure without additional abatement would see an overshoot of the remaining carbon budget and therefore an overshoot of 1.5°C. If you’re unsure why these seemingly small numbers are so important, you can check out this explanation.
We’re losing biodiversity and actual species; we have oceans rising faster than ever before; we have carbon sinks which can no longer keep up with the demands of sequestration we’re putting on them; there are extreme weather events taking lives and livelihoods; we’re seeing food insecurity and water scarcity spread across continents; we can expect billions of people to be displaced by climate disasters or rising seas; and we will see yet further human mortality related to extreme heat and disease (climate related food-borne, water-borne and vector-borne diseases have all been increasing, and will continue to do so).
So where’s this optimism I mentioned? Let’s carefully take a look at how we can keep ourselves buoyed.
Although we are at incredibly high atmospheric CO2 levels (417ppm as I write this), the policies which have been in place and adhered to have meant that several billion tons of GHG emissions have been avoided per year. It’s not enough avoided emissions, but it’s not insignificant either.
We are in the best position yet with regards to alternate sources of energy production. We have solar and wind powered electricity being extremely cheap to access, and the tech to produce it ever more efficiently is also getting less expensive and more accessible. The cost to develop and deploy battery storage is also coming way down. Urban greening, mindfulness about food waste, rewilding, electrification of urban systems and improved land management in all manner of applications are just some of the things the IPCC think are creating positive change. But of course there’s a ‘but’: most adaptation strategies are unequally distributed, incremental, sector specific and often actually maladaptive (they cause more harm than good). There’s widespread and rapid work required to ensure these strategies are realistic and deployed.
One of the major hurdles of adaptation strategies is the money required to finance them. Most tracked climate finance is directed towards mitigation, which on the face of it seems like a good idea…but it still falls short of the levels needed to limit warming to below 2°C or to 1.5°C across all sectors and regions. So directing some funds to adaptation measures might be prudent. It’s not an either/or situation, but a ‘both’. Adaptation options such as disaster risk management, early warning systems, climate services and social safety nets have broad applicability across multiple sectors, so should have a focus. With the ever increasing pubic and political willingness to have this discussion and support climate action, many more countries and cities are including adaptation in their climate policies.
One of the biggest takeaways to provide motivation for action and a reminder that all is not lost, is that every single increment of warming will bring with it more extreme climatic changes. Let’s look at that from the reverse angle: for every increment of warming we avoid, we’ll also avoid further ecocide and human mortality. This is the absolute and basis for each and every one of us maintaining course for a decarbonized and more sustainable lifestyle. Every. Little bit. Helps. That the impacts of global warming are as incremental as the thermometer itself is great news! We really do have it all still to play for.
The other fantastic thing about this SPM is that they’ve provided somewhat of a Dummy’s Guide. They’ve explained where and how the most rapid emissions reductions could be implemented, and where and how to best utilize carbon removal, including both technological and biological methods. There’s even a table on what reductions are required by when to facilitate what outcome! They’ve linked mitigation and adaptation inextricably. There are clearly explained synergies between climate action for the climate’s sake and climate action for economic growth, social and gender justice, human health and wellbeing and food security. The IPCC know that reducing emissions to save the planet might not motivate everyone, but surely amongst all those other benefits, there’s something that is the right angle for all humans on this planet!
So along with jolting and jarring phrases like “Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health” and “There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all” there are also bright shining beacons, trying to ensure that we stay strong, like “Deep, rapid and sustained mitigation and accelerated implementation of adaptation actions in this decade would reduce projected losses and damages for humans and ecosystems … and deliver many co-benefits, especially for air quality and health.” Every incremental reduction in GHGs is beneficial. It’s not all or nothing. Do what you can today to live more sustainably with a smaller carbon footprint than you did yesterday. Every decision we make from here on will impact the livability of this planet. And fight for governmental policy and action to reflect the urgency of the matter at hand. System change is non-negotiable at this point.
