15/09/2021

(The Guardian) Earth’s Tipping Points Could Be Closer Than We Think. Our Current Plans Won’t Work

The Guardian

Climate policies commit us to a calamitous 2.9C of global heating, but catastrophic changes can occur at even 1.5C or 2C

A flash flood caused by Tropical Storm Henri in Helmetta, New Jersey, on 22 August 2021. ‘The extreme weather in 2021 – the heat domes, droughts, fires, floods and cyclones – is, frankly, terrifying.’ Photograph: Tom Brenner/AFP/Getty Images

Author
George Monbiot is a Guardian columnist and the author of Feral; The Age of Consent, and Out of the Wreckage
If there’s one thing we know about climate breakdown, it’s that it will not be linear, smooth or gradual.

Just as one continental plate might push beneath another in sudden fits and starts, causing periodic earthquakes and tsunamis, our atmospheric systems will absorb the stress for a while, then suddenly shift.

Yet, everywhere, the programmes designed to avert it are linear, smooth and gradual.


Current plans to avoid catastrophe would work in a simple system like a washbasin, in which you can close the tap until the inflow is less than the outflow. But they are less likely to work in complex systems, such as the atmosphere, oceans and biosphere. Complex systems seek equilibrium.

When they are pushed too far out of one equilibrium state, they can flip suddenly into another. A common property of complex systems is that it’s much easier to push them past a tipping point than to push them back. Once a transition has happened, it cannot realistically be reversed.

The old assumption that the Earth’s tipping points are a long way off is beginning to look unsafe. A recent paper warns that the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation – the system that distributes heat around the world and drives the Gulf Stream – may now be “close to a critical transition”.

This circulation has flipped between “on” and “off” states several times in prehistory, plunging northern Europe and eastern North America into unbearable cold, heating the tropics, disrupting monsoons.

Other systems could also be approaching their thresholds: the West and East Antarctic ice sheets, the Amazon rainforest, and the Arctic tundra and boreal forests, which are rapidly losing the carbon they store, driving a spiral of further heating. Earth systems don’t stay in their boxes.

If one flips into a different state, it could trigger the flipping of others. Sudden changes of state might be possible with just 1.5C or 2C of global heating.

A common sign that complex systems are approaching tipping points is rising volatility: they start to flicker. The extreme weather in 2021 – the heat domes, droughts, fires, floods and cyclones – is, frankly, terrifying. If Earth systems tip as a result of global heating, there will be little difference between taking inadequate action and taking no action at all. A miss is as good as a mile.

So the target that much of the world is now adopting for climate action – net zero by 2050 – begins to look neither rational nor safe. It’s true that our only hope of avoiding catastrophic climate breakdown is some variety of net zero.

What this means is that greenhouse gases are reduced through a combination of decarbonising the economy and drawing down carbon dioxide that’s already in the atmosphere. It’s too late to hit the temperature targets in the Paris agreement without doing both. But there are two issues: speed and integrity. Many of the promises seem designed to be broken.

At its worst, net zero by 2050 is a device for shunting responsibility across both time and space. Those in power today seek to pass their liabilities to those in power tomorrow. Every industry seeks to pass the buck to another industry. Who is this magical someone else who will suck up their greenhouse gases?

Their plans rely on either technology or nature to absorb the carbon dioxide they want to keep producing. The technologies consist of carbon capture and storage (catching the carbon emissions from power stations and cement plants then burying them in geological strata), or direct air capture (sucking carbon dioxide out of the air and burying that too).

But their large-scale use is described by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as “subject to multiple feasibility and sustainability constraints”. They are unlikely to be deployed at scale in the future for the same reason that they’re not being deployed at scale today, despite 20 years of talk: technical and logistical barriers. Never mind: you can keep smoking, because one day they’ll find a cure for cancer.

So what’s left is nature: the capacity of the world’s living systems to absorb the gases we produce. As a report by ActionAid points out, there’s not enough land in the world to meet the promises to offset emissions that companies and governments have already made.

Even those who own land want someone else to deal with their gases: in the UK, the National Farmers’ Union is aiming for net zero. But net zero commitments by other sectors work only if farmland goes sharply net negative.

That means an end to livestock farming and the restoration of forests, peat bogs and other natural carbon sinks. Instead, a mythical other will also have to suck up emissions from farming: possibly landowners on Venus or Mars.

Even when all the promised technofixes and offsets are counted, current policies commit us to a calamitous 2.9C of global heating. To risk irreversible change by proceeding at such a leisurely pace, to rely on undelivered technologies and nonexistent capacities: this is a formula for catastrophe.

If Earth systems cross critical thresholds, everything we did and everything we were – the learning, the wisdom, the stories, the art, the politics, the love, the hate, the anger and the hope – will be reduced to stratigraphy. It’s not a smooth and linear transition we need. It’s a crash course.

Links - Stories by George Monbiot

(Common Dreams) Climate Emergency May Displace 216 Million Within Countries By 2050: World Bank

Common DreamsJessica Corbett

"The Groundswell report is a stark reminder of the human toll of climate change, particularly on the world's poorest—those who are contributing the least to its causes."

Due to sea level rise, many islands in the Ganges Delta region of West Bengal, India—including Mousuni—are facing fast erosion. Homes and lands are sinking at a steady rate and people are staring at a bleak future where the probability of them becoming climate refugees looms large. (Photo: Arka Dutta/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Underscoring the necessity of immediate and sweeping action to take on the climate emergency, a World Bank report revealed Monday that 216 million people across six global regions could be forced to move within their countries by midcentury.

Groundswell Part 2: Acting on Internal Climate Migration includes analyses for East Asia and the Pacific, North Africa, and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, building on a modeling approach from a 2018 report that covered Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America.

"The Groundswell report is a stark reminder of the human toll of climate change, particularly on the world's poorest—those who are contributing the least to its causes," said Juergen Voegele, vice president of sustainable development at the World Bank, in a statement.
The report's highest projection is for Sub-Saharan Africa, which could see up to 86 million internal climate migrants by 2050, followed by East Asia and the Pacific (49 million), South Asia (40 million), North Africa (19 million), Latin America (17 million), and Eastern Europe and Central Asia (five million). The 216 million figure is a worst-case scenario total for the six regions, Voegele explained in the report's introduction.

"It's important to note that this projection is not cast in stone," he wrote. "If countries start now to reduce greenhouse gases, close development gaps, restore vital ecosystems, and help people adapt, internal climate migration could be reduced by up to 80%—to 44 million people by 2050."

Voegele continued:
Without these actions, the report predicts that "hotspots" of climate migration will emerge as soon as within the next decade and intensify by 2050, as people leave places that can no longer sustain them and go to areas that offer opportunity. For instance, people are increasingly moving to cities, and we find that climate-related challenges such as water scarcity, declining crop productivity, and sea-level rise play a role in this migration. Even places which could become hotspots of climate out-migration because of increased impacts will likely still support large numbers of people. Meanwhile, receiving areas are often ill-prepared to receive additional internal climate migrants and provide them with basic services or use their skills.
"Development that is green, resilient, and inclusive can slow the pace of distress-driven internal climate migration," he concluded. "This report is a timely call for urgent action at the intersection of climate, migration, and development."

As the World Bank's statement outlined, the report's policy recommendations include:
  • Reducing global emissions and making every effort to meet the temperature goals of the Paris agreement;
  • Embedding internal climate migration in far-sighted green, resilient, and inclusive development planning;
  • Preparing for each phase of migration, so that internal climate migration as an adaptation strategy can result in positive development outcomes; and
  • Investing in better understanding of the drivers of internal climate migration to inform well-targeted policies.
"This is our humanitarian reality right now and we are concerned this is going to be even worse, where vulnerability is more acute," Maarten van Aalst, director of the International Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Center, who wasn't involved with the report, told the Associated Press.

The AP noted that though many scientists say the world is not on track for the worst-case scenario in terms of planet-heating emissions, van Aalst pointed out that even under more moderate scenarios, climate impacts are now happening more quickly than projected, "including the extremes we are already experiencing, as well as potential implications for migration and displacement."

Kanta Kumari Rigaud, the World Bank's lead environment specialist and one of the report's co-authors, highlighted that even if political and business leaders take the actions scientists say are necessary to decrease emissions, "we're already locked into a certain amount of warming, so climate migration is a reality."

"We have to reduce or cut our greenhouse gases to meet the Paris target," she told Reuters, "because those climate impacts are going to escalate and increase the scale of climate migration."

While the World Bank's figures focus on internal displacement in specific regions, previous broader analyses have shown the greater impact that the climate emergency is expected to have on migration in the coming decades, boosting pressure on the Biden administration and other major governments to take action now. 

The new report came ahead of a major climate summit for parties to the Paris agreement that kicks off in Scotland on October 31, and as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet on Monday delivered a relevant warning to the U.N. Human Rights Council.

"A safe, clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is the foundation of human life," she said. "But today, because of human action—and inhuman inaction—the triple planetary crises of climate change, pollution, and nature loss is directly and severely impacting a broad range of rights, including the rights to adequate food, water, education, housing, health, development, and even life itself."

Bachelet explained that these interlinked crises "act as threat multipliers—amplifying conflicts, tensions, and structural inequalities, and forcing people into increasingly vulnerable situations. As these environmental threats intensify, they will constitute the single greatest challenge to human rights in our era."

"The greatest uncertainty about these challenges is what policymakers will do about them," she added. "Addressing the world's triple environmental crisis is a humanitarian imperative, a human rights imperative, a peace-building imperative, and a development imperative."

Links

(AU SMH) ‘Walk Away’: Bylong Coal Mine Appeal Rejected

Sydney Morning HeraldPeter Hannam

Proponents of a controversial coal mine planned for a rich farming area north-west of Sydney have had their appeal against an earlier rejection dismissed by the courts, raising the prospect the project will be scrapped.

The Court of Appeal on Tuesday dismissed the appeal by Korean energy giant KEPCO which is seeking to build a so-called greenfield coal mine in the Bylong Valley.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against an earlier rejection of a coal mine planned for the Bylong Valley north-west of Sydney. Credit: Brendan Esposito

The Independent Planning Commission dismissed the plan for a 6.5 million tonne a year mine two years ago, and a previous court appeal was also rejected in part because of the climate change impacts of digging up the fossil fuel.

KEPCO was also ordered to pay the court costs of the Bylong Valley Protection Alliance, which had fought against the mine proposal for years.


Coal
Energy giant loses Bylong coal mine appeal in win for anti-coal groups
Rana Koroglu, a managing lawyer with the Environmental Defenders Office, said it was the third time “this destructive and climate-wrecking coal mine proposal has been defeated”.

“It’s time for the proponent KEPCO to walk away,” Ms Koroglu said in a statement. “The most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report delivered a ‘code red’ for humanity on climate. It’s clear we cannot afford to develop more greenfield coal mines at a time when the world needs to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

In its September 2019 rejection, the IPC noted the Bylong Valley had a long history of farming, including horse breeding, and there was no operating or planned mine within 20 kilometres of the site.

It also estimated the combined greenhouse gas emissions from the 25-year project to be almost 201 million tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent, including the pollution caused by digging, transporting and burning the coal.

The EDO noted the South Korean government, KEPCO’s majority stake owner, had recently committed to increasing its emissions targets to a 40 per cent reduction compared with 2017 levels by 2030.

The Court of Appeal’s rejection of the mine has prompted calls by farmers for the government to press KEPCO to give up its land bank. Credit: Brendan Esposito

“We presented testimony from over a dozen expert witnesses and put the latest scientific evidence before the commission,” Ms Koroglu said. “The IPC made its decision based on that evidence, finding that this coal mine is not in the public interest. Two subsequent appeals have thoroughly tested and supported the IPC’s decision to refuse the mine.”

A spokesma for KEPCO said the the company was “disappointed that the court did not find in favour of the project and will now take some time to review the decision and consider [our] next steps”.

A spokesman for NSW Deputy Premier and Resources Minister John Barilaro said that “any future plans, including what KEPCO might do with land owned freehold by them, is a matter for the company”.

Stephen Galilee, the head of the NSW Minerals Council, said the project had “strong support in the local communities of Kandos and Rylstone because of the much-needed jobs and investment it would have delivered for those towns and across the region”.


Future Power
What's a 'just transition' and can you switch to green energy without sacking coal workers?
“Two years and a pandemic later, the jobs and investment are now needed more than ever,” Mr Galilee said. “The reasons for the project’s rejection were flawed two years ago and they remain flawed today.”

But Bylong Valley locals and the Lock the Gate Alliance separately called on the government to assist the buyback of land KEPCO had wanted to turn into a coal mine. The company holds almost 7000 hectares in the area.

According to Lock the Gate, KEPCO had lost $US405 million ($550 million) on the project and had written down the value of the mining rights from $642 million to zero.

“There is no one operating the local store any more – the valley is a shell of its former self,” Phillip Kennedy, a spokesman for the Bylong Valley Protection Alliance, said.

“We want the Berejiklian government to extinguish the coal licence, just like it did with Shenhua on the Liverpool Plains, so Bylong can once again be the prosperous town it used to be.”

Tim Beshara, manager of Policy and Strategy at the Wilderness Society, called on the government to reconsider plans for other new coal mines in the region, which is close to the Wollemi National Park.

“This court result should cause the NSW government to reconsider their plans to open up more of the Wollemi region to new coal,” Mr Beshara said.

Links