I promise I'll be brief but here's the key sentence:
"Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change."
We have a commitment to 2°C! This was both surprising and excellent to hear and I'm glad this is all in writing with the Paris Agreement. On top of this, there was also a commitment to reviews every 5 years, USD $100 billion a year to help poor countries with climate change mitigation, development of carbon markets, forests conservation and support for renewable energy.
However, there still remains to be a lot of work to be done. It's all well and good to say we'd like to keep warming to under 1.5°C, which was the product of some developing countries (such as island states like the Marshall Islands), who also happened to be the most vulnerable due to being low-lying, but how feasible is this?
Well many scientific reports and opinion pieces that have been published today remain positive about this given there are many possibilities. First, we would have to make emission cuts and fast if we want to never go above 1.5°C; but people remain optimistic that this can be a possibility. Particularly as the 1.5°C threshold is included in the agreement, many scientists and interested parties believe this shows the drive to reach this highly ambitious target and the recognition that the difference between a 1.5°C and a 2°C world is substantial. Secondly, and most supported by scientists, we could overshoot 1.5°C and then return to below it, by having negative emissions (due to carbon capture and storage), before 2100. Finally, there are still many uncertainties with predictions of climate under different warming scenarios, plus the uncertainties of how we'll reach that specific warming, which all contribute to the possibility of staying within 1.5°C of warming.
The last thing I want to leave with you is the simple idea that these temperature thresholds (whether it's 1.5°C, 2°C, 4°C or anything else), represent a probability. I really like this idea because scientists have really simplified such a complex response and system down to probabilities of certain consequences. Essentially, the higher the temperature threshold we cross, the higher probability we have of encountering certain detrimental consequences like dangerous sea level rise. And that's all this Climate Deal is about: trying to reduce the probability of dangerous consequences. I hope we continue to move forward from the Paris Agreement with the same amount of optimism, ambition and motivation to succeed.
And with that, I'll leave you with this cartoon that made me laugh:
Such fantastic news that a global agreement has been made! Are you optimistic about the outcome as a whole, or do you feel that more could still be done to make sure countries stick to targets?
ReplyDeleteI was definitely surprised, but in a good way! I think the agreement has made me a little more positive and if the momentum from Paris can be kept up (along with citizens putting pressures on governments), I'm optimistic that we can stick to targets. Only time will tell but it'll definitely be something to keep up with!
Delete