29/06/2021

(AU SMH) This Time, The ‘Danger’ Sign Must Go Up

Sydney Morning HeraldOve Hoegh-Guldberg

Author
Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is Professor of Marine Studies at the University of Queensland. He is deputy director of the ARC Centre for Excellence in Coral Reef Studies.
There is a distinct possibility that one of our most treasured environmental assets, the Great Barrier Reef, will soon be listed by the World Heritage Committee as “in danger"⁣.

The listing “is designed to inform the international community of conditions which threaten the very characteristics for which a property was inscribed on the World Heritage List, and to encourage corrective action.″⁣

Examples of bleached coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Credit: Jason South

Listing the reef as “in danger” was discussed a decade ago when it was noted “with extreme concern the approval of Liquefied Natural Gas processing and port facilities on Curtis Island”.

About the same time, long-term monitoring by the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) reported a 50 per cent decline in coral populations over almost 30 years.

There were numerous other concerns as well. As a result of these growing threats, UNESCO and the International Union for Conservation of Nature were invited to visit the reef in March 2012, finding that declining water quality, expanding coastal development, cyclones and mass coral bleaching were affecting the reef.

Then came talk of adding the GBR to the “in danger” list. This led to a massive mobilisation by the Queensland and federal governments to convince World Heritage Committee members and the world that Australia had got the message and had taken significant steps to deal with issues such as water quality and limiting the number of industrial ports up and down the GBR coastline.

Adding the reef to the “in danger” list back then was premature, and giving the federal government the chance to implement changes was justified. As I wrote with University of Queensland legal scholar Justine Bell-James in 2014, it “would seem ill-advised that the World Heritage committee remove one of the only levers it currently has over the treatment of the World Heritage-listed GBR.

Work is underway to plant 100,000 healthy corals on reefs in the Cairns and Port Douglas region. Credit: James Brickwood
“The threat of an ‘in danger’ listing is a major incentive for Australia to improve its game, and has already prompted some reform.

With this lever gone, the influence of UNESCO would largely disappear along with, most probably, any political will to prevent the further decline of the once-pristine reef.”

Rightly or wrongly, we have not improved our game enough.

Fast forward to today and the overall health of the Great Barrier Reef has decreased from “poor” to “very poor” in the latest five-year Great Barrier Reef Outlook Report in 2019.

This comprehensive account of the state of the Great Barrier Reef concluded that climate change was its greatest threat, along with coastal development. According to the report, while some gains have been achieved, many gains are occurring too slowly or not at all.


Most significantly has been the rapid escalation of damage from climate change. In just the last five years, the Great Barrier Reef has experienced three record coral bleaching and mortality events. Taken together these impacts have killed at least 50 per cent of shallow water corals. The scale and the impact of these events has been nothing short of shocking.

So, after 10 years of further decline in almost all dimensions plus exceptional heatwave and bleaching impacts, I think that it is time to recognise that the reef is “in danger”.

Others feel that this is a beat-up that involves the 21 members of the Chinese-led World Heritage Committee. For the Minister Sussan Ley, this is about a government being broadsided by UNESCO processes.

For me, however, the science is telling us that we are not doing enough to ensure the recovery of the reef from decades of declining water quality, coastal development and climate change. It is a story about rapid environmental change driving our reef to rubble.

Australia will oppose a draft World Heritage Committee recommendation that Queensland's Great Barrier Reef be singled out for an "in danger" listing.

Importantly, this is also not a time to be giving up, but a time to accelerate our efforts to fix water quality, control crown of thorns starfish outbreaks, and deal comprehensively with the climate problem. We must seek new solutions – and we must also double down on driving Australia and the international communities to zero emissions as soon as possible.

Given the big impacts that are starting to occur on the Great Barrier Reef, we are heading into territory that will be hard to reverse. We must get to the zero carbon emissions as soon as possible, while helping our neighbours to do so as well.


Great Barrier Reef
Australia criticises United Nations warning that Great Barrier Reef is in danger
The good news is that we still have time, but only if we act deeply and fundamentally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to put Australia on a pathway compatible with global warming of 1.5 degrees, which is a critical threshold for corals and many other systems.

The climate science tells us Australia must reduce its emissions to zero by 2035 or sooner.

After all, every tonne of carbon going into the atmosphere will cost us, whether as a loss of jobs and income, or the loss of the intangible benefits of a place like the Great Barrier Reef.

While the issue may be inconvenient for Australia’s leadership, it is a wake-up call to all of us that unless we take deep and serious action on climate change, we face the prospect of our World Heritage-listed Great Barrier Reef no longer being a coral reef paradise.

Links

(ABC) US Cities Set Up 'Cooling Centres' As Historic Heatwave Bakes Pacific North-West

ABC News - ABC/wires

People sleep at a cooling shelter set up in Portland, Oregon. (Reuters: Maranie Staab)

Key Points
  • Areas that normally experience mild weather are reaching temperatures in the mid-40s 
  • Temperatures have soared due to a high-pressure dome
  • The US National Weather Service says more unusual weather patterns could become more common amid rising global temperatures
Cities across the United States Pacific Northwest are setting up "cooling centres" where people can escape a record heatwave baking the region.

Daytime temperatures have been breaking records in places where many residents do not have air conditioning.

Shops have sold out of portable air conditioners, fans, water and sports drinks.

Cities have been reminding residents where pools and cooling centres are available and been urging people to stay hydrated, check on their neighbours and avoid strenuous activities.

"This is life-threatening heat," Jennifer Vines, health officer for Multnomah County in Oregon, said in a statement.

"People need to find some place cool to spend time during the coming days."

Multnomah County, which includes the state capital Portland, opened three cooling centres over the weekend, including one at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland. 

Sunday's forecast temperature of 44 degrees Celsius in Portland would break the temperature record of 42C, set just a day earlier. Another 44C day is predicted on Monday.

The temperature was expected to rise to an all-time record of 40C at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on Sunday and surpass that to reach 43.9C on Monday, as the excessive heat warning continues for the region.
At least one county closed several COVID-19 testing sites because of the heat.

Seattle opened additional public library branches on Sunday, and will again on Monday, to provide additional cooling centres, The Seattle Times reported.

Cooling centres have also been opened in parts of California and elsewhere in the Pacific north-west as the heatwave has gripped the region.

Temperatures had soared due to a high-pressure dome that had built over US and Canada's upper north-west, the National Weather Service said, similar to the atmospheric conditions that punished south-western states earlier this month.

The Salvation Army has been handing out bottled water. (Reuters: Karen Ducey)

The National Weather Service (NWS) in Coeur d’Alene said this week's weather would "likely be one of the most extreme and prolonged heatwaves in the recorded history of the inland north-west".

"Unprecedented heat will not only threaten the health of residents in the inland north-west but will make our region increasingly vulnerable to wildfires and intensify the impacts of our ongoing drought," the service said.

The high temperatures were forecast to move into western Montana beginning Monday.

Experts say extreme weather events such as the late-spring heatwaves that have descended on parts of the US this year cannot be linked directly to climate change.

But more unusual weather patterns could become more common amid rising global temperatures, NWS meteorologist Eric Schoening said. 

Links

(AU BBC) Climate Change: Why Action Still Ignites Debate In Australia

BBCShaimaa Khalil

Australia has seen weather extremes in recent years - from devastating bushfires to record floods. Image copyright Getty Images

Author
  • Shaimaa Khalil is Australia Correspondent for BBC News. She holds a Master's degree in Broadcast Journalism from Westminister University. 
In my first week as the BBC's new Australia correspondent in 2019, a state of emergency was declared in New South Wales. Bushfires blazed and came very close to Sydney.

The orange haze and the smell of smoke will forever be etched in my memory.

As the country woke to pictures of red skies, destroyed homes and burned koalas in smouldering bushland, the climate change debate came to the fore.

But this wasn't a scientific debate. It was political and it was partisan.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison did not answer questions about the issue, while then Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack dismissed climate concerns as those of "raving inner-city lefties".

That was my other big memory of my first week in Australia. The leadership - after years of drought and as blazes raged across the east coast - openly throwing doubt on the effects of climate change.

This was a tussle at the heart of Australian politics.

Climate change is a hotly charged issue here. It draws in the powerful fossil fuel industry and regional voters fearful for their livelihoods.

It's a subject that has ended political careers.

'Vacuum of leadership'

Throughout those months of the Black Summer fire season, Mr Morrison would face fierce criticism about how his government handled the situation - and how it continued to avoid the climate crisis.

The science around climate change is complex but it's clear. Yes, it was not the cause of any individual fire but experts agree it played a big role in creating catastrophic fire conditions; a hotter, drier climate contributed to the bushfires becoming more frequent and more intense.

An inquiry following the Black Summer fires said further global warming is inevitable over the next 20 years - and Australians should prepare for more extreme weather.

Still, Australia's government refuses to pledge net zero carbon emissions by 2050. This refers to balancing out any emissions produced by industry, transport or other sources by removing an equivalent amount from the atmosphere.

In his address to US President Joe Biden's climate conference in April, the prime minister said Australia will "get there as soon as we possibly can".

Climate change remains hotly contested ground in Australia. Image copyright Getty Images

"For Australia, it is not a question of if, or even by when, for net-zero but, importantly, how," Mr Morrison said.

That is at the heart of the problem. The "when" is as crucial as the "how" when it comes to climate change. Scientists and global leaders say Australia is not doing enough, and not going fast enough.

The country is embracing new green technologies, but that's often spearheaded by a frustrated private sector in the absence of central leadership.

"You have many businesses banding together and taking matters into their own hands," says Dr Simon Bradshaw, researcher at the Climate Council, an independent advisory group.

"Almost all of Australia's states and territories are committed to net zero emissions by 2050. It's really just that vacuum of leadership at the federal level," he says.

Dr Bradshaw says while much of the world pushes ahead with action on climate change, Australia is becoming "increasingly isolated".

The power of industry

As it resists tougher emissions targets, the Morrison government also continues to invest in the fossil fuel industry.

Last month it said it will fund a new gas-fired power plant in New South Wales' Hunter Valley, despite experts warning the plant makes little commercial sense long- term.

Mr Morrison recently told a conference of fossil fuel executives that oil and gas will "always" be a major contributor to the country's prosperity.

If you're watching this from the outside, you'd be forgiven for being surprised. But it makes sense from a domestic political perspective.

Australia is among the world's biggest exporters of coal, iron-ore and gas. This is the bedrock of the country's wealth and its thriving economy. It's proven to be political suicide to go against that.

"The fossil fuel lobby continues to be very powerful in Australia," says Dr Bradshaw.

With a slim majority and a looming election, Mr Morrison is aware of what a poisoned chalice climate action is here. This issue has ended the careers of leaders before him including predecessor Malcolm Turnbull, whose efforts to bring back a carbon price policy - a tax on polluting fossil fuels - led to his downfall.

Scott Morrison (L) is under pressure from his UK and US allies to impose tougher emissions reduction targets. Image copyright Getty Images

Mr Morrison also faces pressure from his coalition partners - the National party - and their block of voters.

Many National MPs, who represent rural Australia, have been public about their opposition to the government formally embracing a net zero emissions reduction target.

While still refusing to commit to a target, Mr Morrison has said he wants Australia to achieve net zero emissions "preferably" by 2050. That was enough to anger the Nationals and worry their constituents especially in regional mining communities.

The 'cost' of action

Part of why the politics around climate action is so toxic here is the way the narrative around it has been framed, says Australian National University climate scientist Dr Imran Ahmed.

"The message to the people [has been] that action on climate change is a cost, not an investment," he says.

"It is not jobs or the environment, it is both."

Dr Bradshaw says the country's concentrated media landscape has also shaped views around the climate emergency.

"It's been dominated by largely right wing, and conservative media, and particularly the Murdoch press that's had a heavy influence on public opinion and understanding of the climate crisis."

For regional voters, the messaging around a transition to cleaner energy has been confusing and unconvincing at best - or a cause for fear and anxiety about their future at worst.

"We have to be mindful of existing coal communities and the people that have jobs [in the fossil fuel industry].

"They need to be prepared with the necessary skills to transition into the new industries," says Dr Ahmed.

Some koalas were rescued from Australia's bushfires but many perished. (Report from September 2020)

Mr Morrison has been adamant that "technology not taxes" is the way forward - knowing the backlash he would face if he were to impose carbon pricing.

But scientists say technology on its own is not enough and that what is needed is a combination of all measures; reduction targets, new technology for clean energy and a carbon tax.

Mr Morrison is stuck between two unrelenting pulling forces; his own party and his governing coalition partner standing firmly behind the country's fossil fuel industry - and an increased international pressure from strategic allies like the UK and the US for tougher emissions reduction targets.

The first is about the prime minister's domestic political standing. The second is about Australia's standing in the world.

Links

28/06/2021

(AU The Guardian) From Barnaby Joyce To The Great Barrier Reef, Coalition Climate Inadequacy Is On Parade

The Guardian

Australia’s government is still in denial, caught unawares by the tide of global opinion moving against it

‘The National party has just re-elected as its leader Barnaby Joyce, whose main policy position appears to be to ensure such a target is never set.’ Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP

How the heck can this still be happening?

It’s 2021 and we have a government within sight of an election with no policy on climate change that endeavours to reach net zero emissions, and the National party has just re-elected as its leader Barnaby Joyce, whose main policy position appears to be to ensure such a target is never set.

Climate change denial continues to be the strongest force in Australian politics.

Instead of a target we have, as foreign affairs minister Marise Payne articulated so circuitously last week on Insiders, a “broad position of the Australian government that we want to achieve net zero emissions as soon as possible and preferably by 2050”.

That is a shift from their once saying they wanted to achieve it in the second half of this century – that’s what counts as progress in this country.

The whispers continue that the government is trying to come up with an actual target, but I am not Charlie Brown, so I’ll let others try to kick Lucy’s football.

At no point has this government done anything to make net-zero emissions achievable, let alone acknowledge that 2050 will be too late to limit temperatures to rising 2C above pre-industrial levels.

To be fair, there is no pressure on them to acknowledge this, given the Labor party is stuck on 2050, and most of the media also think it is some magical timeframe that will solve all climate change ills.

It’s rather apt, given the past 30 years, that governments around the world have finally settled on an emissions target that is sold as being wonderful and yet is manifestly inadequate.

I guess this is “the good” that should not be the enemy of the perfect.

Even more apt is that this inadequate target remains well beyond the scope of the Morrison government, especially now Joyce is back.

Inadequate is not enough.

It might be easy to forget, during a cold winter, or even as we exit a La Niña period, that the world continues to warm.

Over the past 50 years temperatures have risen within an ever-rising 0.3C range.



The problem is that while we are currently experiencing lower temperatures, they are lower only relative to the most recent El Niño period.

Over the past year global surface temperatures have been 1.1C above the average of the last part of the 1800s. That is below the record of 1.3C set in 2016, but is still warmer than any time before December 2015.

It’s not just that the hot years are getting hotter; the “cold” years are less cold.

It’s not just that the policy is inadequate, it is that the Morrison government continues to hope it will skate by on such a policy with no consequences.

Clearly it has been caught unawares by the tide of global opinion moving against our inadequacies.

We already have the EU and the G7 musing about carbon tariffs that almost seem designed with Australia in mind, and then this week came the news that Unesco has recommended the Great Barrier Reef world heritage site be listed as “in danger”.

Both these aspects highlight that climate change policy is actually economic policy. And you need to act right now – not in or “preferably by” 2050.

Environment minister Sussan Ley – the same person who in 2019 went for a snorkel on the reef and declared it “vibrant” – instead blamed Unesco’s processes and argued that it blindsided the Australian government – a charge Unesco strenuously disagrees with.

It is odd, however, that this could be a shock to anyone, given Graham Readfearn reported earlier this month that such a listing was very much on the cards, and the government’s own Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority had listed the reef as “very poor” back in 2019.

This decision not only points to our lack of action on climate change but also the Morrison government’s complete diplomatic failure.

Failure and inadequacy – the hallmarks of this government’s climate change policy since 2013.

Links

(NZ Herald) Green Hydrogen: New Zealand Scientists Edge Closer To Climate-Friendly Fuel Future

 NZ Herald - 

Green hydrogen is being used to fuel New Zealand's first hydrogen fuel cell bus, unveiled by Auckland Transport in March. Image / Auckland Transport

Scientists are edging closer to making green hydrogen a star of New Zealand's clean energy future, as the Government injects millions more dollars into a major research effort.

Green hydrogen has become a growing focus of New Zealand's "just transition" away from oil and gas because it can be created sustainably, using renewable energy or biomass.

It's being eyed as a climate-friendly way to generate electricity, power engines and heat homes and make fertilisers.

While hydrogen is produced around the world, nearly all of it is "brown" hydrogen - or that made from coal and natural gas, and the source of hundreds of millions of tonnes of CO2 emissions each year.

But green hydrogen can be made by using electrolysis from renewable energy sources, leaving little carbon footprint.

The biggest drawback?

It remains expensive to produce.

That's a barrier a GNS Science-led research programme is aiming to overcome, through pioneering new approaches to make the energy source affordable, efficient and plentiful.

With a $9 million boost through the Government's Advanced Energy Technology Platform (AETP), scientists will push ahead in developing three ways to make green hydrogen.

That includes creating it from water using an electrolyser - currently the most common approach - but also using energy directly from sunlight to split the water, as well as high-energy plasma.

Already, GNS scientists have been working to improve a system of water electrolysis called polymer exchange membrane, or PEM.

In contrast to the more commonly used "alkaline" electrolyser, PEM is better suited to working with the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources like wind and solar that could provide electricity for hydrogen production.

While it has the advantage of being readily adaptable to large-scale hydrogen production, PEM systems still rely on catalysts based on metals that are rare, expensive or inefficient – and which ultimately make green hydrogen more expensive than fossil fuels.

GNS Science scientists (from left) Dr John Kennedy, Dr Michelle Cook and Dr Jerome Leveneur are working to make green hydrogen a viable future energy source for New Zealand. Image / GNS Science

The project's leader, Dr John Kennedy, said New Zealand had a chance to be a "world leader" in the production and export of green hydrogen – shifting us from an importer to an exporter of energy.

Currently, New Zealand brought in about 60 per cent of its energy in the form of oil and coal - and green hydrogen offered a chance to make the country more self-sufficient. Specifically, hydrogen could replace fossil fuels for stationary power and transport industries that contributed 40 per cent of our greenhouse gas emissions.

"We'll be working with partners from across New Zealand and around the world, developing our industry capability and creating innovative solutions which will lead to a globally-connected green hydrogen economy," Kennedy said.

The project also aims to scale up the hydrogen industry by training engineers, scientists and technicians.

"The AETP funding will include grants, scholarships and placements to develop skills in the green hydrogen industry – to ensure that qualified people are available to fill the jobs that will be created as the industry grows," GNS Science energy materials scientist Dr Michelle Cook said.

"We're particularly focused on partnerships with iwi and wananga, to support the learning and development of rangatahi Māori in the energy sector."

The horizon-scanning H2 Taranaki Roadmap, produced by local agencies, has already forecast that hydrogen will be increasingly produced using electricity to split water, with the only emission being oxygen.

The report found hydrogen could be utilised as a fuel, particularly for heavy vehicles, as a feedstock for products such as urea or methanol, or to store electrical energy for long periods of time from weeks to years.

A new network could include storage of hydrogen or synthetic natural gas in depleted gas fields, it said, and electricity generation using green hydrogen in Taranaki's gas-fired peaker plants.

Earlier this year, New Zealand and German scientists joined forces in a new research alliance focused on advancing green hydrogen technology.

And last month, Christchurch-headquartered cryocooler developer AFCryo unveiled a new production system to provide a cheaper and more reliable way of generating green hydrogen.

Links

( Axios ) Global Warming Makes Extreme Weather A Regular Event

AxiosAndrew Freedman

Earth's climate has drastically
shifted in three decades


Global average temperature anomalies during 1981-1990 and 2011-2020, compared to 1981-2010 average.
Data: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; Graphic: Axios Visuals

The climate change the planet has seen so far, now that the world has warmed by about 1.2°C (2.16°F) since the preindustrial era, is already resulting in unprecedented and destructive events worldwide.

Why it matters: In the past few decades alone, climate change has shifted from a far-off problem disconnected from our day-to-day lives to a crisis to be grappled with here and now.
  • From the dried-out landscape of the Southwest to the rapidly warming Arctic, the shifts we've already seen have resulted in what some researchers call "weather weirding," as deadly and damaging weather events supercharged by global warming strike with increasing regularity.
The details: A look at just the past few years shows a climate that's already separated from the conditions that existed when millennials were born starting in the 1980s.
  • The last colder-than-average month globally, compared to the 20th century average, was February 1985. Each of the past three decades has been hotter than the one before it.
  • All the 10 warmest years have occurred since 2005.
  • The oceans, which absorb most of the extra heat trapped by greenhouse gases, are warming so rapidly that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's chart of ocean heat content has had to be continually adjusted upwards to accommodate the new readings.
Extreme events: Climate change has manifested itself in the form of extreme weather and climate events that have cost lives and property.
  • During 2020, California saw its worst wildfire season on record, with massive fires also occurring in other Western states as well as Siberia and Australia, among other areas.
  • Due to human-caused global warming, heat waves are becoming more severe and longer-lasting across large portions of the globe, from the American Southwest to the Middle East.
  • A burgeoning scientific field known as extreme event attribution focuses on the links between climate change and extreme weather events, with some of these studies showing that individual events could not have occurred without human-caused global warming.
  • Sea level rise is leading to a dramatic increase in so-called "sunny day flooding" — floods caused by high tides combined with higher sea levels rather than weatherin major cities along the East Coast of the U.S., a trend that is forecast to continue.
What's next: The summer of 2021 is a prime example of the costly extreme weather that's becoming the norm, with a severe drought in the West combining with record heat waves to create ideal conditions for wildfires in much of the region.

Yes, but: Studies show that the more we cut emissions of greenhouse gases — especially if we do it quickly the better our chances are of averting truly catastrophic consequences of climate change, such as the collapse of the Greenland or West Antarctic Ice Sheets.
  • Upcoming climate negotiations in November are aimed at securing enough emissions reduction commitments to avert such disastrous outcomes.
  • However, even if all emissions were to stop today, the long atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide — on the order of 1,000 years per each molecule — means that we will have to cope with climate change's effects for the rest of our lives.
  • Because of this, adaptation efforts are underway to make society more resilient to climate shocks.
  • Also, the relentless and steep upward march of emissions has plateaued to some degree, though the necessary cuts have not yet begun.
The bottom line: How severe the effects will be is largely up to us. Innovation in the energy sector to create the clean technologies of the future, as well as the resources we already have available, such as wind, solar and battery technology, mean we can cut emissions by large amounts starting now, depending on the political will. 

Links

27/06/2021

(USA Yale University) Yale Experts Explain Climate Change


Experts Dan Esty and Miranda Massie break down one of the most pressing environmental and social challenges of our time. 

How do we define climate change?

Climate change is the long-term change in the average weather patterns of Earth’s local, regional, and global climates.

“For about the last ten thousand years, the Holocene period in geological terms, humanity has occupied a fairly stable climate,” explains Miranda Massie (GSAS M.A. ‘92), Director and Founder of The Climate Museum.

“While there have been changes from time to time, they are slight in the context of planetary history, and overall, weather systems have been predictable and coastlines have remained in place. Those conditions of relative stability are what allowed agriculture and then civilization to flourish.

"In other words, the Holocene climate is a basic precondition for what we understand about ourselves and our society. What we are seeing now is the fundamental disruption of that stability.”

What are some of the main causes of climate change?

“The fundamental changes to the stability of our climate are primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like oil, coal, and natural gas, which started at a mass scale during the Industrial Revolution,” Massie says. 

Dan Esty, Hillhouse Professor of Environmental Law and Policy at the Yale School of the Environment and Yale Law School, explains that when we burn fossil fuels to do things like power our homes and vehicles and engage in most agricultural and manufacturing processes, we emit greenhouse gases.

Often referred to as “GHGs”, these gases act like a heat-trapping blanket over the planet and prevent the heat that comes from sunlight from leaving the atmosphere. Some of the more common greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons, and all have different heat-trapping capacities. 

“In addition to emitting greenhouse gases, another contributor to climate change is our destruction of carbon sinks, or places that would naturally store this carbon for us and keep it out of the atmosphere,” Esty says.

“Plants and trees, for example, are natural carbon sinks. When we have a forest that is cut or burned down, we lose a sink, and we therefore lose some of the ability of the earth to absorb carbon dioxide. Widespread deforestation and changes in land use patterns, therefore, are significant drivers of the climate crisis.”

Massie also points out that while burning fossil fuels and eliminating carbon sinks is the clear physical cause of the climate crisis, this fossil fuel-based economy does not exist independently from our culture. 



“The cultural and social context for the climate crisis is critical.  Inevitably, the burning of fossil fuels as our primary source of energy both comes from and reinforces basic social understandings and practices developed over time: how human beings have come to relate to the rest of the natural world and to each other.

"At the heart of this lies a culture of exploitation–the sense that the rest of nature exists, inexhaustibly, for human use alone–and that some human beings similarly exist as resources for others with more social power.

"Colonization, rigid racial hierarchies, and the simultaneous fetishization and abuse of coal miners are examples of exploitation and dehumanization in our history and culture.

"These dynamics are deeply bound up with the fossil fuel economy,” Massie says. “Therefore, the entire organization of society and culture can also be usefully understood as the cause of climate change.”

What evidence tells us that climate change is happening?

“There is copious and irrefutable evidence that climate change is happening, but a lot of it is not immediately apparent to the average person,” Massie says. “For example, the concentration of carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gases in the atmosphere is not something that you and I can directly perceive. It’s something that scientists have measured.”

Esty explains that there is an entire science dedicated to extrapolating and tracking global temperatures and carbon dioxide levels across human history.

Scientists can reconstruct human history by carving out polar ice cores or sediment from the ocean floor and examining their physical and chemical makeup to understand how the environment has changed over centuries.

“As a result of this science, we know very clearly that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from a couple of 100 parts per million (ppm) in pre-industrial times to over 400ppm now,” Esty says. “That is a signal that we’ve dramatically increased the level of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere.”

Massie adds the example of the oceans becoming more acidic as they absorb higher levels of carbon dioxide, both of which can be measured by scientists and further proven by things such as the bleaching of coral reefs. 

However, for some communities around the world, climate change is already quite tangible.

“In recent years, we have seen growing evidence of increased intensity of windstorms, hurricanes, flooding, and more devastating forest fires,” Esty says, giving examples from the last decade including Hurricane Sandy and the Australian wildfires.

“We have also seen glaciers and ice sheets crack and melt, causing measurable sea level rise. All of that gives us a signal that we’ve got a real problem that needs to be addressed.”

What are the impacts of climate change, both to the environment and to humans? 

Climate change has and will continue to increase local, regional, and global temperatures and alter weather patterns. As Esty points out, these changes will lead to more severe weather events and natural disasters, ultimately disrupting communities and infrastructure around the world. 

“We also know that there will be devastating impacts to species and ecosystems that humans don’t directly connect to or rely on,” Esty adds. “The stress of increased temperatures and ocean acidification may prove too much for certain species, causing them to collapse.”

Increasing temperatures will also melt glaciers at the Earth’s poles, which will not only affect the species that live there, but will also cause global sea level rise. This will impact coastal communities and ecosystems by eroding or engulfing the land and heightening the risk of severe flooding. 

“Because of the historically stable climate, we’ve developed a robust civilizational infrastructure that is geographically anchored,” Massie explains. “You can’t just take farmland that’s been developed over the course of hundreds of years and move it north every three to five years.

As Climate Scientist Katharine Hayhoe says, if it were five thousand years ago, as the sea levels rise, we would just pick up our coastal encampments and move them further inland. But that’s hard to do, if your coastal encampment is modern New York City or Hong Kong.”

A change in weather patterns will also have serious consequences for our global food system.

“Changes in rainfall patterns and new periods of drought are particularly concerning, as they may alter the lands that are suitable for food production as well as the types and amounts of crops that can successfully grow and feed our global population,” Esty says. 

Massie points out that these disruptions to our homes, infrastructure and food systems will challenge the equitable access to the necessities of life and put great stress on the social fabric of humanity.

“The climate crisis has a number of cascading and interacting effects that are already disrupting the foundations of our civilization and causing massive public health problems–including 8.7 million deaths annually from the fossil fuel particulate matter alone.

"Very importantly, climate impacts intensify existing inequalities rather than reducing them–while also creating new ones,” Massie says. 

Massie goes on to explain that many communities around the world who will experience the most devastating effects of climate change have often contributed the least to the crisis and/or are least equipped to protect themselves. 

“Island Nations, for example, have contributed virtually nothing to climate change, and yet they may have the physical home for their sense of belonging, their national identity and culture completely wiped out by sea level rise,” Massie explains.

“In Miami, the Haitian community is under pressure to leave Little Haiti, which sits on elevated ground, as real estate developers look to make way for wealthier, mostly white new residents fleeing the beachfront flood zone as sea levels rise.

"There are examples everywhere. The fossil fuel economy requires sacrifice zones, and sacrifice zones require racism and other hierarchies … It’s important to include in the definition of the climate crisis that it is a crisis of social inequality.”

What is being done to prevent and prepare for climate change?

Our experts explain that there are two key approaches to prevent and prepare for climate change: mitigation and adaptation.

“Mitigation is the attempt to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions going into the atmosphere,” Esty explains. “It also includes efforts to increase and protect the sinks that are absorbing carbon dioxide.”

There are a wide range of mitigation efforts happening at the local, regional, country, and international scales. A key area of focus is moving towards energy efficiency and a transition to a clean energy grid, which is one that relies on renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydro power that do not emit greenhouse gases.

This shift has implications for transportation and shipping, industry and manufacturing, agriculture, construction, and our material consumption as we know it.

"For decades, countries around the world have collaboratively committed to reducing global emissions through international treaties like the Paris Climate Agreement, and individual regions, states, and cities have put forth policies and plans to reduce emissions domestically. 

Esty mentions a new component of climate change mitigation currently being researched by scientists that is meant to deal with the GHGs we have already emitted.

This area of research is called “geoengineering”, which is the deliberate large-scale manipulation of an environmental process that affects the Earth’s climate, in an attempt to counteract the effects of global warming.

Esty explains that this strategy involves everything from designing technologies to reflect solar radiation back into space to developing man-made ways to capture or ‘sequester’ carbon and store it in the ground. 

Importantly, while geoengineering may help to reduce some of the severe impacts of climate change as we transition our energy grid, the human alteration of natural global processes comes with its own set of ethical concerns.

The second key approach to preparing for climate change is called adaptation. 

“Adaptation is simply figuring out how we as a society can live with at least some of the impacts of climate change,” Esty says. “Sometimes this is described as resilience, or hardening ourselves to the changes in weather, temperature, and systems that will undoubtedly come.”

This might involve moving or retrofitting coastal homes, roads, rail lines, and power plants that are under increased risks of flood due to sea level rise, or adding additional green spaces to cool down urban areas that will experience extreme heat as temperatures rise. 

Massie explains that the inequities of climate change are also apparent within access to mitigation and adaptation resources. For example, while adaptation efforts are expected to save money down the line, they take a large amount of upfront investment, which is something that not all communities have. 

Truly mitigating and equitably adapting to climate change, Massie believes, will require a shifting of individual mindsets and social policies. 

“You cannot imagine getting to a resilient, zero-carbon economy and society without major interventions toward equality and toward a different set of relationships among humans and with nature,” Massie says.

“Our entire mode of being has developed as a complex, interconnected system, and our energy source can’t be simply severed from that.”

What role do individuals play in mitigating and/or adapting to climate change?

“To meaningfully take on climate change, we need to be hugely ambitious,” Massie says. “It is not just the responsibility of government, but also all of society and all of culture. Scientists have agreed that the worst impacts can almost certainly be avoided, but to do that we need the broadest possible public engagement.”

When it comes to mitigating climate change, Esty adds that in the near future, we should expect incentives to switch to more sustainable forms of transportation, like electric vehicles or biking, as well as renewable energy. The impact associated with one’s food choices will likely also become a public concern.

“People should be prepared to pay for the harms they are in effect causing when they consume high greenhouse gas emitting products, with meat consumption being a particularly notable example,” Esty says.

In terms of adaptation, Esty says that it is imperative for individuals to think about their risk to climate impacts like severe weather and to prepare themselves, their property, and their community accordingly.

Massie points out that we will also need individuals to stand up for their communities in an activist capacity to demand that their elected officials move away from the interests of and reliance on fossil fuel companies and take ambitious climate action.

“These are huge challenges that we as a society can meet, if we establish the correct social, political and cultural context in which decisions get made,” Massie says. “To get started properly, we have the technology we need–what we don’t have yet is the will to implement it at the required scale and speed.

"We need intensely ambitious and community-minded action by government at all levels and across the private sector, sustained for a long time. In turn that requires a broad cultural shift toward civic engagement and action–the mobilization of people coming together to push that forward–both activists who are already deeply involved with the climate justice struggle and, critically, the broader public as well.”            

What is Yale Doing?


In 2020, Yale met its greenhouse gas emissions goal of reducing emissions by 43% below 2005 levels, despite a 21% growth in the campus footprint. This achievement was made possible by countless individuals and academic and operational departments on campus.

Some notable contributions to this goal include:
  • Significant investments in our energy supply. We updated our power plants and increased our reliance on renewables like solar and geothermal energy.
  • Retrofits of older campus buildings to become more energy efficient.
  • Employment of new design guidelines to ensure for the highest standards of efficiency in new construction and renovations while improving the usage of existing campus space.
  • Personal energy reductions through participation in initiatives like the Yale Carbon Charge Recess Checklist.
In summer 2021, Yale announced a new emissions reductions target that includes achieving zero actual carbon emissions — in other words, reducing carbon emissions to zero without having to purchase carbon offsets — by 2050, and reaching net zero emissions by 2035, or “zero” emissions after offsets and other campus reductions in emissions are factored in.

More information can be found in the full announcement from Peter Salovey and Scott Strobel.

Links

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative