The IPCC Report 2018

During 2016 Paris climate talks the policymakers commissioned the UN Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) to provide a 'Special Report' on the impact that a global warming of 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels would have and this was published last week.  As always, it is quite a dry report, but fall of important information about where we are so far and how it looks for the future (and you do get used to the style pretty quickly).

So here are some of what I think are the key points:

• Human activities has caused an estimated warming of around 1.0℃ above pre-industrial levels, ranging from 0.8℃ to 1.2℃ and in keeping with estimated rises for this period.  At the current rate we expect the temperature to rise to 1.5℃ between 2030 and 2052.
• Warming from human activity from the pre-industrial period until present will continue for at least millennia and carry on affecting our climate, but are unlikely to cause the rise in temperature to 1.5℃ on their own if we are able to reach and maintain 'net-zero global anthropogenic CO2 emissions'.  However, in the future negative emissions in the future may be required in the future to prevent an increase in further warming due to earth systems feedback, to reduce sea level rise and sea acidification.
• The impact on natural and human systems will be greater at 1.5℃ then it is at 1.0℃, and greater at 2.0℃ then it is at 1.5℃.  This is quite an obvious statement, but these are some of the examples of how different:
• Keeping global warming at 1.5℃ rather than 2.0℃ may reduce the number of people exposed to climate induced water stress by 50%.
• Sea level rise will be 0.1m less in 1.5℃ global warming then 2.0℃ putting an estimated 10 million less people at risk and reducing the loss of coastal habitats.
• The loss of coral reefs at 2.0℃, at greater then 99%, is higher then at 1.5℃, at 70% to 90% (though, to be fair, both are pretty bad).
• A sea-ice-free summer Arctic Ocean is likely to occur once every century at 1.5℃ but once every decade at 2.0℃.
• The increased impact of climate change on the oceans will affect our fishing industries with one model showing projected decrease in global annual catch of 1.5 million tonnes for an increase of 1.5℃, but a decrease of 3.0 million tonnes for 2.0℃ of global warming.
• Poverty and disadvantages are expected to increase in some populations, especially in those that rely on agricultural and coastal livelihoods, but by limiting temperature rise to 1.5℃ rather than 2.0℃ reduces the number of people exposed to this risk by several hundred million by 2050.
• The current targets set by nations at the Paris Agreement are not enough to limit global warming to 1.5℃.  For this to happen carbon emissions need to start falling well before 2030.
• We will need to cut our emissions by about 45% by 2030, reducing it to zero by 2050 to limit global warming to 1.5℃.  For a global warming in 2.0℃ that would be a reduction in our emissions of about 20% by 2030 and zero by 2075.  To limit global warming to 1.5℃ we will need to make 'rapid and far-reaching' changes to energy systems (with renewable energy supplying 70-85% of our energy and coals 0%), land systems (converting land for feed-crops to energy-crops and reforestation), and urban and infrastructure systems (low energy public transport), as well as industrial systems (such as carbon capture and the use of sustainable bio-based feedstocks).
• From the four pathways IPCC mapped out to achieve the 1.5℃ only increase in global warming (showing different combinations of land use and technological change) reforestation, adoption of carbon capture technology, changes to electric transportation, and significant changes to our behaviour were shown to be essential in all of them.
• If done properly, these changes could not only reduce climate change to 1.5℃ but also help sustainable development and help reduce poverty overall (I did find this repeated statement quite interesting as it removes the planet vs human argument people like to have as an excuse not to do anything).
• They admit that there is a knowledge gap and insufficient data to calculate the true cost of 'climate-resilient investments', but have estimated that reaching the 1.5℃  target may cost three to four times as much as the 2.0℃  targets.  However, adaptation costs will be far higher in the 2.0 global warming scenarios and far outweigh the cost of doing nothing.

'Needless to say the response to the IPCC 2018 Report by the world's governments has been overwhelming' is unfortunately not a statement I'm going to be making.  Instead it was the business as usual reaction with statements of 'this is terrible' but no actual changes implemented and even some governments stating it has nothing to do with humans (you know who they are, I'm not going to mention them here).  And what has the UK Government done?  Sent a letter to our Committee on Climate Change (CCC) asking for advise on if further action is needed to meet the Paris Agreement of 2016.  Way to go at really grabbing the climate bull by the horns, it's not like it's extinction threatening or anything.  

I have to admit I was hoping for something a bit more urgent on the subject, but I'm not surprised by the response.  This is one subject that's always put on the back burning whilst they deal with something 'more important'.  However, we've been given only 12 years to reduce out carbon emissions by 45% and the report has made it clear that the 1.5℃ rise in temperature isn't just going to be bad for island communities, but for everyone.  '2.0℃ because we're not a tiny island' just isn't going to cut it.  More than anything this report reminds me that it's really important that I take action myself.  Whilst the governments need to step up and play their part (and we really need to start putting the pressure on them to do so), how I live my life also has an impact and by living more sustainably in all areas of my life I can be a part of the process that helps steer us to the 1.5℃ only rise in global temperature.  Relying on others to do it all just isn't going to cut it.