(AU SMH) What Keeps Climate Scientists Like Me Awake At Night - And Why The Next 10 Years Are So Critical

 Sydney Morning Herald - Lesley Hughes

Author Lesley Hughes, a spokeswoman for the Climate Council, is a professor of biology and pro vice-chancellor at Macquarie University.

Every day, thousands of Australians find or experience a bodily symptom that could be a harbinger of something serious. Perhaps a suspicious lump, or a mole that has changed colour, or unusual gut pain.

The sensible strategy, and one that most of us would take, would be to hightail it to our doctor at the earliest opportunity to get it checked out. Should the news be bad, most people would seek the life-saving treatment they need.

At 1C warming, Australians already confronts drought and catastrophic fires. We don’t want to countenance warming of 3C. Credit: Nick Moir

But what if you decide to wait – let’s say for a few years, or even a decade to two, perhaps to 2050 or beyond. By then, you might reason, imaging technology and treatments will have improved, so no point rushing things. This second strategy is clearly reckless, potentially putting your health, and perhaps life, in real danger - and unnecessarily so.

But this is exactly what our federal government is doing by delaying real action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – putting our livelihoods, our environmental support system, and our children’s futures at risk – and unnecessarily so.

The latest report from the Climate Council of Australia, Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet This Decade, lays out the science behind the necessity of urgent near-term climate action. The diagnosis is in, now the treatment must be ramped up with a greater sense of urgency than ever before, and we have to do it in the next 10 years.

Why this decade? Imagine that the accumulated greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere is a mountain that we need to scale and then descend as quickly as possible. The problem is that this mountain is not a solid, stable piece of terrain but is getting higher and steeper every day. The longer we delay getting to the top and start to head down, the higher the mountain becomes, and the tougher the challenge.

Facing the climate ‘endgame’ in a world bound for 1.5 degrees warming

What we have to lose by not getting over the mountain has been laid out in forensic detail by climate scientists for decades – more frequent and severe weather events like floods, bushfires, heatwaves, droughts. Declining crops, loss of species, degraded ecosystems, and higher insurance bills are just some of the consequences.

For Australia, this could manifest in the loss of coral reefs, uncontrollable bushfires every year, a ravaged coastline, and uninsurable assets.

With just over 1C of global warming we have already lost half the hard coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef, a global icon that provides billions to the Australian economy and employs tens of thousands of people.

After the hottest and driest year on record in 2019, the Black Summer bushfires affected 8 million Australians, with more than 30 killed directly and another 400 deaths attributable to smoke inhalation. Half our ancient Gondwanan rainforests were burnt, probably irreparably, and three billion vertebrate animals were killed or displaced.

Unless we radically reduce emissions in the next few years, we are on track for about 3 degrees of warming by the end of this century. With the impacts of just over 1 degree already a clear and present danger, you don’t need to be a climate scientist to do the future maths.

All this should be serious enough to warrant significant action. But if I can stretch the mountain analogy a bit further, the thing that keeps climate scientists awake at night is the real prospect that the summit could become so high and so unstable that an avalanche – a tipping point – could be triggered.

At worst, a runaway greenhouse effect could take the Earth’s climate system beyond a point where human life and civilisation could be sustained.

Australia to use Biden summit to repair ‘climate wars’ damage

To do our fair global share, Australia needs to triple the level of its current ambition to cut emissions and aim for a 75 per cent reduction by 2030, and net zero by 2035. Net zero by 2050 is at least a decade too late.

This means no new coal mines, no “gas-led recovery”, no more magical thinking about some new method of carbon capture and storage. We’ve got the sun, wind, land and water. We’ve got the brains, the science and the technology to do it now.

US President Joe Biden’s upcoming climate summit is a golden opportunity for Australia to finally shed its status as – in his climate envoy John Kerry’s words – a “roadblock” to climate action.

 We need to commit to a 2030 target that is ambitious and fair. There is no safe level of global warming, and every fraction of a degree of avoided heating will be measured in lives, ecosystems and communities saved.

What will happen to our cities (and beaches) at 3 degrees of warming?

With concerted action we can still hold global average temperature to well below 2C. We need to act in our national interest by being a leader of solutions, not clinging to 18th century technology.

The task ahead is undoubtedly challenging, but just as a healthy lifestyle has more benefits than just longevity, so too does concerted climate action – clean jobs, clean manufacturing, new export opportunities and regenerated landscapes.

Delay is the new denial. Putting off treatment for a serious medical problem is reckless.

The climate emergency must be approached with the same sense of urgency.

Links

• Climate Council Report: Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet this Decade (pdf)
• Australia needs net-zero carbon emissions by 2035 to prevent catastrophic climate change: Climate Council (audio)
• Report claiming global temperature rise will top 1.5C by 2030s divides scientists
• Impacts at 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming
• New report: Australia must triple its climate goal this decade
• The Australian Government is surrounded by leaders taking climate action. Will it step up?
• Coalition can’t conceal inaction on climate from US with ‘smoke and mirrors’
• Biden has hit the accelerator, but Australia's leaders remain stuck in climate change paralysis
• New focus on climate change adaptation but no sign of 2050 emissions commitment
• After a series of dramatic events, Morrison is facing a very different playing field in 2021

(BBC) World's Wealthiest 'At Heart Of Climate Problem'

BBC - Roger Harrabin

Copyright PA Media

The world’s wealthy must radically change their lifestyles to tackle climate change, a report says.

It says the world's wealthiest 1% produce double the combined carbon emissions of the poorest 50%, according to the UN.

The wealthiest 5% alone – the so-called “polluter elite” - contributed 37% of emissions growth between 1990 and 2015.

The authors want to deter SUV drivers and frequent fliers – and persuade the wealthy to insulate their homes well.

The report urges the UK government to reverse its decision to scrap air passenger duty on UK return flights.

And it wants ministers to re-instate the Green Homes Grant scheme they also scrapped recently.

The document has come from the UK-based Cambridge Sustainability Commission on Scaling Behaviour Change.

It’s a panel of 31 individuals who study people’s behaviour relating to the environment. They were tasked to find the most effective way of scaling up action to tackle carbon emissions.

Their critics say the best way to cut emissions faster is through technological improvements - not through measures that would prove unpopular.

But the lead author of the report, Prof Peter Newell, from Sussex University, told BBC News: “We are totally in favour of technology improvements and more efficient products - but it’s clear that more drastic action is needed because emissions keep going up.

“We have got to cut over-consumption and the best place to start is over-consumption among the polluting elites who contribute by far more than their share of carbon emissions.

Copyright Getty Images

“These are people who fly most, drive the biggest cars most and live in the biggest homes which they can easily afford to heat, so they tend not to worry if they’re well insulated or not.

“They’re also the sort of people who could really afford good insulation and solar panels if they wanted to.”

Prof Newell said that to tackle climate change, everyone needs to feel part of a collective effort – so that means the rich consuming less to set an example to poorer people.

He continued: “Rich people who fly a lot may think they can offset their emissions by tree-planting schemes or projects to capture carbon from the air. But these schemes are highly contentious and they’re not proven over time.

The wealthy, he said, “simply must fly less and drive less. Even if they own an electric SUV that’s still a drain on the energy system and all the emissions created making the vehicle in the first place”.

Sam Hall, from the Conservative Environment Network, told BBC News: "It’s right to emphasise the importance of fairness in delivering (emissions cuts) - and policy could make it easier for people and businesses to go green - through incentives, targeted regulation and nudges.

“But encouraging clean technologies is likely to be more effective, and more likely to enjoy public consent, than hefty penalties or lifestyle restrictions."

But Prof Newell said existing political structures allowed wealthy firms and individuals to lobby against necessary changes in society that might erode the lifestyles of the rich.

The recent report of the UK Climate Assembly, for example, proposed a series of measures targeting carbon-intensive behaviours such as shifting away from meat and dairy produce; banning the most polluting SUVs; and imposing frequent flyer levies.

The Treasury told BBC News that a frequent flyer levy might require the government to collect and store personal information on each passenger.

This could raise issues of data processing, handling and privacy issues. It would also be hard to keep track of people with multiple passports.

But the commission’s report said: “The goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change cannot be achieved without radical changes to lifestyles and shifts in behaviour, especially among the wealthiest members of society.

“If change across society is to be brought about at the speed and scale required to meet agreed climate targets, we need to shrink and share: reduce carbon budgets and share more equally.”

The report is the latest in a long-running dialogue over what it means to be “fair” while tackling climate change.

Poorer nations such as India have consistently argued that they should be allowed to increase their pollution because it’s so much lower per person than emissions from rich nations.

The issue forms part of the tangled tapestry of negotiations behind next week’s climate summit organised by President Biden and the COP climate summit in the UK scheduled for November. 

Links

• The report of the Cambridge Sustainability Commission on Scaling Behaviour Change (pdf)
• ‘Polluter elite’ should be UK climate policy target, finds report led by Sussex academic
• 'Polluter elite': World's wealthiest contributing to 37 per cent of emissions growth - report
• World's richest 1% cause double CO2 emissions of poorest 50%, says Oxfam
• G7 should double help for poorer countries to cut CO2 emissions, says UN
• UK's Cop26 president calls for world to get on track to hit net zero by 2050
• CO2 emissions: nations' pledges 'far away' from Paris target, says UN
• The Paris agreement five years on: is it strong enough to avert climate catastrophe?
• Humanity is waging war on nature, says UN secretary general
• World's 26 richest people own as much as poorest 50%, says Oxfam

(SMH AU) Damage Bill From Natural Disasters To Treble By 2061

Sydney Morning Herald - Matt Wade | Nick O'Malley

More frequent and intense natural disasters fuelled by climate change are forecast to cost NSW between $15.8 and $17.2 billion a year by 2061 – more than three times the current damage bill from weather-related destruction.

A NSW Treasury study on climate change risk predicts rising sea levels will expose between 39,000 and 46,000 properties in the state to coastal erosion or inundation by 2061, causing property damage and loss of land estimated at between $850 million and $1.3 billion each year.

Flooding along the Macdonald River last month. Credit: Janie Barrett

More prevalent heatwaves will also take a heavy economic toll in coming decades – between 700,000 and 2.7 million additional days of work are forecast to be lost every year by 2061 due to the higher frequency of very hot weather.

Agriculture in the state will also suffer. By 2061, lost production in agriculture due to changed rainfall patterns, runoff and temperatures is estimated to be between $750 million and $1.5 billion.

The forecasts are included in a new technical research paper that will inform the state government’s next intergenerational report, due to be published in mid-2021.

The research paper evaluated how climate change would affect natural disasters, sea level rise, heatwaves and agricultural production over the next 40 years under three global warming scenarios defined by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – a lower warming scenario, an intermediate scenario and a higher warming scenario.

Treasurer Dominic Perrottet said the report showed that the state must continue to invest strongly in resilience initiatives.

“Australia has always been a land of extremes, and risk associated with our climate is something we deal with year in and year out,” he told the Herald.

“Just last month communities across the state battled floods following years of drought and some of the worst bushfires in recent memory.

“The report projects that these risks will likely continue and increase into the future, and that they will likely also carry significant costs for the state.”

In 2019 Mr Perrottet stood by an earlier address he had made to the conservative think tank the Centre for Independent Studies arguing that Labor and the Greens overspent on climate change bodies and downplaying the significance of Australia’s contribution to global warming.

According to the new report, bushfires are expected to increase more than other natural disasters, with the change in risk estimated at between 2 and 24 per cent by 2061 for NSW, depending on whether global warming is at the lower or higher end of the forecast range.

Sydney desalination plant churning out water even as dams remain full

Flood risk is projected to increase by up to 12 per cent by 2061 while the risks posed by severe storms – including hail and thunderstorms, east coast lows and the effects of tropical cyclones – is forecast to increase by between 2 and 5 per cent by 2061.

The report projects the total economic costs of natural disasters in NSW to increase to between $15.8 billion and $17.2 billion a year by 2061 (in real 2019-20 dollars), up from $5.1 billion in 2020-21.

However, the damage bill could vary greatly from year to year.

“If recent variability in the actual instance of natural disasters was repeated, total economic costs in any single year could range from $30 million to $75 billion (real 2019-20 dollars) under the intermediate warming scenario,” the report said.

‘Black water’: The three Australian sites that are ground zero for climate change

The spate of severe natural disasters in NSW during the past 18 months including drought, bush fires and floods has drawn attention to the threat climate change poses to the state’s economic and fiscal position.

“In 2019-20, economic output in the agricultural sector was the weakest in a decade following a prolonged drought, and the NSW government spent a record amount on natural disaster relief,” the Treasury report says.

The impact of climate change, particularly under higher warming scenarios, is expected to significantly intensify in the second half of the 21st century, a period beyond the scope of the Treasury study.

Links

• An Indicative Assessment of Four Key Areas of Climate Risk for the 2021 NSW Intergenerational Report (pdf)
• The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Sixth Assessment Report
• Extreme summer ahead: Premier warns of flood, fire in coming months
• (AU) 'Criminally Irresponsible': Climate Experts Slam Narrabri Coal Seam Gas Approval
• (AU) Climate Change ‘A National Security Threat’: Report
• (AU) Australia's Bushfires Among The World's Worst Weather Disasters 'Boosted' By Climate Change, Report Finds
• The Undeniable Link Between Weather Disasters And Climate Change

(AU Climate Council) Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need To Plummet This Decade

Climate Council - Will Steffen | Lesley Hughes | Simon Bradshaw | Martin Rice | Dinah Arndt

Climate scientists have observed with mounting concern the continuing emissions and the rise in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

For decades, they have issued dire warnings about what is at stake and what is required to curb global warming.

Yet global temperatures continue to rise, along with damages from extreme weather.

This report “Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet this Decade” is the Climate Council’s science-backed vision for what Australia’s best effort could look like. Australia is a nation of currently high emissions but rich renewable energy resources.

The country has been ravaged by unprecedented bushfires, droughts, and floods in recent years, and decision makers should not ignore these warnings.

LARGE IMAGE

“Australia, as an advanced economy and major emitter, and one with unrivalled potential for renewable energy and other climate solutions, should be a leader not a laggard, and reduce its emissions even faster than the required global average. Every tonne of emissions avoided matters, and every delay has an escalating cost. We urge you all to take this report seriously and respond accordingly.” — Professor Christopher Field and Dr Kevin Trenberth

Key Findings 1. Climate change is accelerating with deadly consequences. The ecological systems that have sustained human life and societies for generations are being severely damaged by increasing heat and worsening extreme weather events. There is no safe level of global warming. Already, at a global average temperature rise of 1.1°C, we’re experiencing more powerful storms, destructive marine and land heatwaves, and a new age of megafires. Multiple lines of evidence strongly suggest the global average temperature rise will exceed 1.5°C during the 2030s. Should temperatures spike above 1.5°C for a significant period of time, critical ecosystems on which we depend (such as the Great Barrier Reef) would be even more severely damaged, or destroyed. Every fraction of a degree of avoided warming matters, and will be measured in lives, species and ecosystems lost or saved. We must do everything possible to deeply and rapidly cut our emissions, while also preparing for climate impacts that can no longer be avoided. There’s little time left to limit global warming below catastrophic temperature rises. Breaching 1.5°C of warming significantly increases the risk of triggering abrupt, dangerous and irreversible changes to the climate system. 2. Our response must match the scale and urgency of this worsening situation. Action to deeply reduce emissions this decade will determine whether the climate system can or cannot be stabilised at warming of well below 2°C. While action is increasing in Australia and world-wide, it remains too slow and not enough. Protecting Australians from the worsening effects of climate change requires all governments, businesses, industries and communities to strongly step up their activities to deeply reduce emissions during the 2020s. The lion’s share of the effort to get to net zero emissions needs to happen this decade. Delaying further than we have already would mean that even more rapid and disruptive action to reduce emissions is required later. Governments, business and industry are committing increasingly to net zero targets. However, timeframes for these commitments are generally too long. The world achieving net zero by 2050 is at least a decade too late and carries a strong risk of irreversible global climate disruption at levels inconsistent with maintaining well-functioning human societies. Australian governments, businesses, industries and communities can and must cut emissions deeply. Given the scale of the global emissions reduction task, and taking into account Australia’s very high level of emissions and our huge renewable energy resources, Australia should aim to reduce emissions by 75% below 2005 levels by 2030 and reach net zero emissions by 2035. This is a fair and achievable contribution to the global task and an imperative given our high vulnerability to escalating extreme weather. 3. As momentum for climate action gathers speed around the world, all efforts must now focus on steps that can be taken this decade. The change in US government has ushered in a new era of international cooperation on climate change. All commitments must be scaled up, and the pace of action must accelerate if we are to avoid the worst climate consequences. Australian state and local governments as well as many leading business and community groups are already providing vital leadership in implementing climate solutions. Many of Australia’s strategic allies and major trading partners (including the US, EU, UK, Canada) have strengthened their climate commitments for this decade, or intend to do so. The Australian Federal Government is standing still, and alone. Australia, as a major emitter in its own right and a giant of the global fossil fuel economy, has a major role to play in the global effort to stabilise the climate. Bold and decisive climate action ultimately protects us and is in our national interest. 4. Australia has everything it needs to act swiftly and decisively to help avert climate catastrophe, and prosper in a global clean economy. Australia has unrivalled potential for renewable energy, new clean industries, and clean jobs. We need to rapidly scale up the energy transition and advance solutions in other sectors including transport and agriculture. Climate leadership from states and territories has shown what works, and the benefits that decarbonising our economy can bring, such as regional jobs, cleaner cities and cheaper power. It’s time for a concerted national push, and for the federal government to work with other tiers of government, along with industry and communities, to rapidly step up this work and deliver much deeper cuts in emissions. Despite our natural advantages, we are being left behind in the new, clean economy race. Urgently ramping up our ambition is fundamental both to Australia’s economic future, and to ensure our children and grandchildren can not only survive but thrive. The change will not always be smooth. There are political, technical and other challenges ahead because action has been delayed. However, the alternative – a decision to not do enough, or to delay – will lead to massive climate disruption. Catastrophic outcomes for humanity cannot be ruled out if we fail to meet the climate challenge this decade.

Links

• Climate Council Report: Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet this Decade (pdf)
• Australia needs net-zero carbon emissions by 2035 to prevent catastrophic climate change: Climate Council (audio)
• Report claiming global temperature rise will top 1.5C by 2030s divides scientists
• Impacts at 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming
• New report: Australia must triple its climate goal this decade
• The Australian Government is surrounded by leaders taking climate action. Will it step up?
• Coalition can’t conceal inaction on climate from US with ‘smoke and mirrors’
• Biden has hit the accelerator, but Australia's leaders remain stuck in climate change paralysis
• New focus on climate change adaptation but no sign of 2050 emissions commitment
• After a series of dramatic events, Morrison is facing a very different playing field in 2021

(AU ABC) Bold Challenge To Decarbonise Australia In 15 Years Laid Down By Climate Council

ABC Science - Nick Kilvert

Renewables need to dominate our energy mix within the next decade, according to the report. (Supplied: Tadgh Cullen DP Energy)

Key Points Australia needs to reduce emissions by 75 per cent by 2030 and reach net zero by 2035, the report says The US is expected to announce increased Paris targets as early as next week The EU is already in talks to slap tariffs on imports from high-emitting nations

A new report from the Climate Council lays out an ambitious challenge to Australian governments and industry: get carbon emissions to net zero by 2035. 

Failure to do so could see us become increasingly economically isolated from our trading partners and at greater risk of climate-related disasters, according to the report authors.

The US Biden presidency has "ushered in a new era of climate cooperation" that Australia will be left out of if we don't radically increase our emissions reduction efforts, they say in today's report, Aim high, go fast: Why emissions need to plummet this decade.

They've warned if Australia continues to have targets that lag behind those of our trading partners, we could cop a de facto carbon tax from them.

"The EU and others may slap import tariffs [on our exports]," said Will Steffen from the ANU's Climate Change Institute, and the report's lead author.

He said there would be increasing pressure on Australia to take tougher emissions reduction targets to COP26, the UN climate conference to be held in Glasgow in November, where many countries are expected to do the same.

A tariff on our exports by importing countries would make it harder for Australia to compete with less polluting economies, said the Climate Council's Nicki Hutley, who was not an author of this report.

Countries who have shouldered the cost of transitioning to cleaner infrastructure are likely going to attempt to "level the playing field", she said.

"We were very much always focused on the costs of action and now it's about the costs of inaction and missed opportunities.

"It's mainly the EU that has come up with the proposed scheme — they call it a 'carbon border adjustment mechanism'.

"It's effectively [saying], 'why should European manufacturers be punished when others aren't pulling their weight [on emissions reduction]?'."

Professor Steffen said he expected the US to significantly ramp up its own emissions reduction target this year, which would in turn put further pressure on countries like Australia to do more.

"I would be surprised if it was any weaker than 40 per cent and it might go to 50 per cent [emissions reduction] by 2030," he said.

"I don't have any inside information, but that's my speculation.

"In being such an important ally, what [the US] does is going to have a big impact on what happens here."

US President Joe Biden is expected to announce new 2030 targets next week, as 40 countries including Australia attend a virtual leaders' summit on climate on April 22 and 23.

Mr Biden announced plans for the summit in his first few days in office.

"In his invitation, the President urged leaders to use the summit as an opportunity to outline how their countries also will contribute to stronger climate ambition," a White House statement said.

Government concerned about 'carbon tariffs'

 Australia's current targets are a reduction of between 26 and 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030.

A spokesperson for the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction Angus Taylor said they welcomed the Biden administration's return to the Paris Agreement and "increasing global focus on the practical solutions" for achieving net zero.

"We have a strong 2030 target," they said.

"We are developing a long-term emissions reduction strategy which will be released ahead of COP26."

However, they said carbon tariffs "aren't a solution to rising global emissions".

"We are concerned about the EU's proposal for a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)," the spokesperson said.

"Such a mechanism risks becoming a new form of protectionism and undermining international cooperation on climate change."

How do we get to net zero?

Getting to 80 per cent renewable energy by 2030 is achievable, according to Climate Works modelling. (Getty Images: acilo)

Today's Climate Council report outlines the need to reduce Australia's emissions by 75 per cent by 2030, on the way to achieving net zero by 2035.

Several scenarios have been modelled to achieve this using existing technology, including by Climate Works — a climate policy research group working within Monash University's Sustainable Development Institute.

Given the scale of the reductions required, emissions cuts need to come from all sectors with a focus on energy efficiency, decarbonising the grid, switching to renewable fuels and carbon offsetting, Climate Works' Amandine Denis-Ryan said.

"It's achievable to have 80 per cent renewables by 2030," she said.

"[We also need] a reasonably fast electrification of transport. So 75 per cent of new car sales by 2030 and 60 per cent of new truck sales [need to be electric]."

Electric vehicles and machinery, and cleaning the grid, will allow industry to achieve significant emissions savings.

But the key is for government investment to leverage the private sector, she said.

At least 75 per cent of new car sales need to be electric by 2030 to help us achieve net zero emissions by 2035, according to modelling. (AP: Ben Margot/File)

Using public money to reduce the cost of clean energy and infrastructure, such as electric vehicle and truck fleets, could allow investment at a scale that will in turn reduce costs.

"What we need to see is large-scale mechanisms that are going to create that pull, not only by government, but also by the private sectors," Ms Denis-Ryan said.

"For instance, there's a lot of interest globally at the moment in hydrogen. If capital is deployed at scale in this technology, we could see very strong cost reductions and accelerated deployment by 2030.

"The clean hydrogen export industry in Australia could be as big, or bigger, than coal exports."

Economic opportunities are already presenting themselves for countries that are making rapid transitions to renewables, according to Professor Steffen.

Singapore, for instance, is looking for opportunities to get to net zero carbon emissions.

However, being a large city on a small island, it will have to import clean energy and invest in offshore offsets to do this, he said.

"That’s an open invitation to Australia. This is a huge opportunity that we shouldn’t miss," Professor Steffen said.

It's 'time to rethink our
sea-change and tree-change dreams'

Scattered housing in "at risk" areas must be replaced with sustainable resilient community models, according to researchers. Read more

The federal government's "Technology Investment Roadmap" will drive $70 billion in new investment by 2030, according to Mr Taylor's spokesperson.

"It's a plan to accelerate new and emerging technologies like hydrogen, batteries and soil carbon," they said.

"The Morrison government is already supporting the uptake of future fuels technologies, such as electric vehicles."

But Professor Steffen says the government is lagging behind global momentum.

"They're really way behind what's happening in technology and what's happening in other countries," he said.

"I would be surprised if they took [this report] seriously. But I think a lot of people will take it seriously; certainly people in the private sector will take it seriously."

1.5C target already gone without drawdown?

Mass reforestation is one of the few proven methods of carbon capture, but is limited in how much carbon can be captured and for how long. (ABC Newcastle: Robert Virtue)

The ambition of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change was to limit warming above pre-industrial levels to "well below" 2C, and preferably 1.5C. But that 1.5C target is now unachievable without overshoot and drawdown, according to today's report.

This means we will overshoot 1.5C of warming, and then use technologies to draw down CO2 from the atmosphere, eventually returning average warming back to 1.5C or below.

But the problem with relying on drawdown is that no technology to do this has so far been proven to work, or to be feasible at scale.

Instead, we are limited to things like soil carbon capture and mass tree planting.

However, there is not a scientific consensus that we can no longer keep warming to within 1.5C; indeed, many climate scientists still think we can.

Adjunct Professor Bill Hare from Murdoch University and Dr Carl-Freidrich Schleussner from Humboldt University say they have been trying to raise issues with this claim with the Climate Council for the past six months, "to no avail".

"The big challenge their report reinforces is the need for urgent action to get on that 1.5C pathway, [so] it's very paradoxical to me that they've chosen to attack that target," Dr Hare said.

In a rebuttal to the 1.5C overshoot claim, Dr Hare and Dr Schleussner argue that the science still very much supports 1.5C as an achievable target.

"This bold claim is in contradiction with a range of other recent high-level scientific reports, including the UNEP Gap Reports and the recent IPCC Special Report on 1.5˚C (IPCC SR15)," they said.

"It is clear that the evidence presented in the Climate Council of Australia report itself does not support their claim that 1.5C will be exceeded. Nor that 'significant overshoot and subsequent drawdown' would be the consequence."

Maintaining the 1.5C limit will be on the agenda at next week's summit.

“A key goal of both the leaders' summit and COP26 will be to catalyse efforts that keep that 1.5-degree goal within reach,” a White House statement said.

The modelling done by Climate Works included significant investment in tree planting to reach net zero emissions in Australia by 2035.

But there are limits to the amount of carbon that forestry can capture, and the length of time it can be stored.

Avoiding warming in the first place is still our best option, according to Professor Steffen.

Without drawdown, our best hope is now to aim to limit warming to 1.8C. On our current trajectory, we will overshoot 1.5C around the mid-2030s, he said.

"Basically we can still hold temperature rise to well below 2C and do that without overshoot and drawdown.

"Every tenth of a degree actually does matter — 1.8C is better than 1.9C, and is much better than 2C."

At 2C, tropical reef-building corals are expected to "mostly disappear", and about 10.4 million more people will be exposed to impacts from coastal weather and sea-level rise at 2C compared to 1.5C, according to the IPCC.

Australia is also expected to experience much more intense bushfires, floods, droughts and other severe weather and climate events at 2C, compared to 1.5C.

"Adaptation is going to become more important, challenging and costly," Professor Steffen said.

"But this reinforces the mantra that every tenth of a degree matters.

"Despite the scale of losses at 1.5C, there remains much that can be protected."

While transitioning to a net zero economy over the next 15 years will be difficult, Professor Steffen said not moving as quickly as possible to get emissions down will be more costly in the long run.

"The targets we’ve proposed for Australia … take into account our technological capability and what I think are our moral and ethical obligations," he said.

"Instead of doing the minimum, we should do our best. Doing our best will actually have a lot of benefits for us, not just in stabilising the climate, but [for] our society and economy."

Links

• Climate Council Report: Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet this Decade (pdf)
• Australia needs net-zero carbon emissions by 2035 to prevent catastrophic climate change: Climate Council (audio)
• Report claiming global temperature rise will top 1.5C by 2030s divides scientists
• Impacts at 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming
• New report: Australia must triple its climate goal this decade
• The Australian Government is surrounded by leaders taking climate action. Will it step up?
• Coalition can’t conceal inaction on climate from US with ‘smoke and mirrors’
• Biden has hit the accelerator, but Australia's leaders remain stuck in climate change paralysis
• New focus on climate change adaptation but no sign of 2050 emissions commitment
• After a series of dramatic events, Morrison is facing a very different playing field in 2021

(AU The Guardian) Report Claiming Global Temperature Rise Will Top 1.5c By 2030s Divides Scientists

The Guardian - Lisa Cox

Climate Council report says most emissions cuts need to occur in the next decade to keep global heating below 2C

• Coalition can’t conceal inaction on climate from US with ‘smoke and mirrors’
• WWF Australia creates legal fund to fight projects threatening forests
  
  

A report by the Climate Council has claimed that the global average temperature rise will likely breach 1.5C by the 2030s. Photograph: Brook Mitchell/Getty Images

A report by the Climate Council claiming that the global average temperature rise will likely breach 1.5C by the 2030s has caused division in the scientific community.

The report, published on Thursday, follows controversy over similar arguments made in a review by the Australian Academy of Science, which said global aspiration of limiting global heating to 1.5C was now “virtually impossible” to achieve.

In its report, the Climate Council says the majority of emissions cuts need to occur within the next decade to keep global heating to well below 2C and avoid major, irreversible tipping points.

US climate research outpost abandoned over fears it will fall into sea.  Read more

It says Australia, to do its fair share, needs to effectively triple its emissions reduction target to 75% on 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2035.

The report does not argue that the long-term Paris goal is lost but says the global average temperature rise will likely overshoot 1.5C and will require drawdown – the removal of carbon from the atmosphere – to bring temperatures back down below this level.

“The science is telling us that global average temperature rise will likely exceed 1.5C during the 2030s, and that long-term stabilisation and warming at or below 1.5C will be extremely challenging,” the report says.

It says if temperatures spike above 1.5C for a significant period of time, ecosystems already affected by existing warming of 1.1C will become even more severely damaged.

“Climate-related damages will be widespread and could, in some settings, be an existential threat,” the report says.

Will Steffen, one of the report’s authors, said despite the fact that countries were already experiencing severe effects of climate change, every fraction of a degree by which further temperature rises could be limited mattered.

“Every 10th of a degree of avoided warming is very important for us,” he said.

He said keeping global heating well beneath 2C was achievable, particularly when major economies such as the US, China, the EU, the UK and Japan were strengthening their emissions reduction commitments.

Australia, by comparison, was being “rapidly left behind” as one of few countries without a net-zero emissions target.

'Every choice matters': can we cling to hope of avoiding 1.5C heating?  Read more

The report’s analysis of the feasibility of limiting warming to 1.5C argues that multiple lines of evidence – including future warming that is locked into the system from emissions that have already occurred, current climate trajectories and the available global carbon budget – suggest this will be exceeded, at least temporarily.

The Climate Council said the report was peer-reviewed by Australian and international scientists.

“It is a case of putting these different lines together,” said Simon Bradshaw, another of the report’s authors and the Climate Council’s head of research.

“The whole point of pointing this out is to drive home the message of how urgent these emissions reductions are.”

It is the conclusion about 1.5C that has caused concern in some quarters of the scientific community.

The Climate Council made its report available to journalists under a strict embargo that included the condition that reporters not share the report with any external experts prior to publication.

Environmental groups were also asked to sign non-disclosure agreements before they received an advance copy of the report.

But climate scientists Carl-Friedrich Schleussner and Bill Hare obtained a leaked copy and have written an 11-page rebuttal to the report’s conclusions about the 1.5C goal.

Hare, who also questioned the Australian Academy of Science report that drew on Steffen’s work to make a similar finding, said the council’s overall conclusion about the urgency of rapid action on climate change in the next decade was correct.

But he said the council’s claim that countries can no longer limit global heating to 1.5C contradicted recent scientific reports, including by the United Nations Environment Programme and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“The claim that we can no longer limit warming to 1.5C is based on some fundamental scientific errors,” Hare said.

“Essentially, it is clear that the evidence presented in the Climate Council of Australia report does not support their claim that 1.5C will be exceeded.”

He said the report’s conclusion that carbon budgets showed countries couldn’t limit warming to 1.5C was especially problematic because there were uncertainties around the numbers.

“A recent paper by leading experts concluded there was 50% margin of error around carbon budget estimates,” Hare said.

Big Weather: Indigenous artists reflect on climate crisis – in pictures.  Read more

However, Andy Pitman, a scientist at the Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes at the University of New South Wales, said it was “a statement of fact” that temperatures would overshoot 1.5C and require technology to bring them back down.

“It’s simply not possible to limit warming to 1.5C now,” he said.

“There’s too much inertia in the system and even if you stopped greenhouse gas emissions today, you would still reach 1.5C [of heating].”

Monica Richter, of WWF Australia, said the feasibility of the 1.5C from a scientific point of view could not be a discussion that was “decoupled from the political and moral consequences of breaching 1.5C”.

“At its core, the possibility of limiting warming to below 1.5C remains an issue of politics rather than of science,” she said.

Bradshaw said while there was ongoing discussion in the scientific community, there was “absolute fundamental agreement on the task at hand, which is to get emissions to plummet”.

Links

• Climate Council Report: Aim High, Go Fast: Why Emissions Need to Plummet this Decade (pdf)
• Australia needs net-zero carbon emissions by 2035 to prevent catastrophic climate change: Climate Council (audio)
• Impacts at 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming
• New report: Australia must triple its climate goal this decade
• The Australian Government is surrounded by leaders taking climate action. Will it step up?
• Coalition can’t conceal inaction on climate from US with ‘smoke and mirrors’
• Biden has hit the accelerator, but Australia's leaders remain stuck in climate change paralysis
• New focus on climate change adaptation but no sign of 2050 emissions commitment
• After a series of dramatic events, Morrison is facing a very different playing field in 2021

(AU) Racked With Guilt And Grief And Climate Despair – How Do We Go On!?

The Guardian - First Dog On The Moon

We are not surrendering! Just the opposite in fact, we are getting on with it despite everything

Cartoon by First Dog on the Moon

LARGE IMAGE

Links

• (AU) A New Report Suggests Sea Creatures Are Fleeing The Equator! 
• (AU) The Global Climate Disaster Misinfornado Will End Up Killing Way More People Than The Texas Ice Storms
• (AU) 2020 Was A Poisonous Sea Snake Lurking In The Foam-Covered, Storm-Lashed Beaches Of A Year
• (AU) If You Think Covid Is Bad, Wait Until You Hear About The Climate Crisis
• (AU) It's Your Regular Arctic Death-Spiral Update With Brenda The Civil Disobedience Penguin
• (AU) Holiday Scomo or melting ice cap? Try these fun and spooky costume ideas for Halloween
• (AU) Which weird Australian fuzzy mammal you are possibly unfamiliar with is your favourite? Let’s find out!