A Realistic Review on the 1.5° Pathway

Drawing inspiration from some recent news articles shared by some classmates, I find interesting to review the conversation previously outlined on the 1.5°C pathway which the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) declared in its "Special Report - Impacts of Global Warming 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Level" (2018) as the most promising resolution towards a sustainable future climate change.

The study concluded that by minimizing the climate warming to 1.5°C before 2100, we would have been able to minimize the adaptive consequences to a sustainable new future, whereas with an increase already of 0.5 degrees C more (warming of 2 degrees C) the consequences would have been disastrous with a very high probability of threats towards unique systems, extreme events and distribution of impact. 


The study proceeds to outline possible mitigation pathways and their related impact on the slowing of climate change in order to advise the policy makers towards the most effective results.

It did not take long to minimize and ridiculise the outcomes of this study.

In only four years, society was able to fail so considerably that the far hope of 1.5°C warming from pre-industrial age is a remote dream. 

Analysing three recent articles, the common denominator is simple: green-house gases emissions are at historical highest levels and the pathway to 1.5° is not a credible one anymore. If current pledges made by governments are followed thoroughly, we would still experience a warming of 2.5° C by 2050. Countries have agreed in 2017 Cop26 to increase and improve their pledges, but little has been done so far. There would need to happen a further decrease of 45% of currently pledged GHG emissions reductions in order to oblige to the 1.5°C warming and 30 per cent for 2°C. It is as well generally acknowledged that the main driver of the emissions increase is the food industry.


The conclusions from this data are very clear: we must demand our policy makers for stricter regulations and higher sanctions. We must decide collectively as a society to cut the opening of new oil and gas facilities, while at the same time boost the financial market to increase their investments into sustainable corporations and start ups. Last but not least, the consumers' preferences must adjust accordingly: with a switch in the goods availability and financial trends, the consumers should automatically adapt to a more accessible greener choice and make it the norm.

References:

United Nations Environment Programme (2022). Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window — Climate crisis calls for rapid transformation of societies. Nairobi. https://www.unep.org/emissions-gap-report-2022 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/26/magazine/visualization-climate-change-future.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/more-bad-news-planet-greenhouse-gas-levels-hit-new-highs

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/27/climate-crisis-un-pathway-1-5-c

Commenti

Post popolari in questo blog

Italy and its Protected Areas

Umbrella Species as a Conservation Practice: Benefits and Limitations

Just Transitions for Energy and Climate