Introduction: The five global warming scenarios
We’re now up to day 10 of the COP26, and now to the point of being tentatively able to project the long term results of what’s been promised by the countries participating, whether those promises will be sufficient to keep the 2100 temperature at or below the critical 1.5oC value, and how compliance with those promises will be monitored. An initial draft became available on Wednesday 10 November to help with this assessment.
As a reminder, the above banner shows expected 2100 temperatures based on current policies, current pledges, and optimistic net zero targets, plus two other scenarios that would keep temperatures from exceeding 2.0oC and 1.5oC. In both latter cases, by 2100 the mean global temperature would already be past its peak and trending downward.
Reprise of the Goals for the COP26
The overarching global goals for the work of the COP26 were introduced in advance to the start of the conference:
1. Secure global net zero by mid-century and keep 1.5 degrees within reach
2. Adapt to protect communities and natural habitats
3. Mobilize finance
4. Work together to deliver
While I think you all know the answer, let’s see what some others think COP26 did to meet the goals list.
Climate Activists
Greta ThunbERG
Her thoughts in a tweet on 4 November: An AP story on her take this afternoon (Friday, 12 November): I might also add that the climate people on DKos are aware that there were more oil and gas lobbyists at COP26 than representing any other interested party/country/movement. You get the drift. george monbiotThis is the first in a thread, which you can read by clicking the tweet above. He doesn’t sound too happy either. the next generation who will have to live with *our* decisionsRead that leaflet in the tweet below. God love the kids that had the idea. The kids are clearly NOT alright. Climate ScientistsDr. Katharine Hayhoe has been active as both a climate scientist and climate communicator for much of her professional life. A good description of her work can be found here. I think she’s a good representative of climate scientist opinions. The problem is that we must reduce carbon emissions by 50% by 2030 to reach the 1.5oC target, as we see in the banner graphic represented by the green dashed line (with uncertainty shaded) for greenhouse gas emissions. Further explanation of this necessity is next. an aside about Net-zero: TIMING IS EVERYTHINGWhile net-zero by 2050 is a big thing, there are effective and ineffective ways to accomplish it. The timing of emission reductions is paramount in reducing global warming and its associated damage to infrastructure, agriculture, the poor and the front line nations most susceptible to, for example, sea level rise. This is illustrated in the tweet below. On the left are various color coded scenarios for reaching net-zero by 2050. The light gray line represents halving global emissions by 2030, with the dark gray and black curves meeting the halving goal by 2025 and 2027, respectively. The area under each of these curves represents the total accumulated emissions for that scenario between now and 2050. This is quantified in the right hand graphic. The halving by 2030 scenario results in a total addition of greenhouse gases of about 1051 units over the next 29 years. A linear decrease (yellow) takes until 2036 to halve emissions, and results in an addition of 1550 units, and so on. The slowest (brown) never reaches 50% reduction until 2050 itself, and requires a 70% reduction during that year; this is totally unrealistic unless we come up with a greenhouse gas supersponge to sop up emissions by then. And the supersponge is not really an answer, as we will have added 2691 units of emissions by the 2050 target. american physical societyThis group of American physicists made a statement in 2015 that was full of caveats about anthropogenic climate change. |
Countries of the World
Front line nations
These nations have been the first affected by sea level rise and other impacts of global warming. Among these is the island nation of Tuvalu, which has a population of 10,507 over 26 square kilometers in the South Pacific near the International Date Line at 5-10oS. Tuvalu made quite a “splash” when their representative, Simon Kofe, gave his country’s statement to COP26 from knee-deep in water near the Tuvalu coastline.
This was tweeted out on 7 November and “went viral”:
A large percentage of greenhouse gases and the attendant global warming has been emitted almost completely by the industrial countries in the Northern Hemisphere. It’s only fair that the “mobilization of finance” be accomplished by those nations for both mitigation and adaptation for nations in need.
Activities on Financial Mobilization
In the latest news from COP26 found in the San Francisco Chronicle, we know that charitable organizations have pledged $3 million for “irreversible damage resulting from climate shocks.” Given that the total goal is $100 billion, there must be more money found to provide effective help.
And that is where talks have been stalled for much of this last day of COP26.
Front-line nations: negotiating for their survival
A number of news stories today have discussed the problem of the front-line nations request for funds to essentially allow their nations to survive sea level rise resulting from global warming. As of last check this evening (just past midnight 13 November in Glasgow), there were still sticking points over financial aid, fossil fuels, and future commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Some choice quotes from National Public Radio transcripts:
Frans Timmermans, Lead Negotiator, European Commission:
… The ones who are in immediate danger are ... living on small island states in the Pacific and the ones in the Caribbean who are suffering every year, with the weather becoming more and more erratic.
So, I think there's a lot of people who are already suffering now. ...
Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish First Minister:
If (a good agreement) doesn't get across the line, it's only going to be because of a lack of political will, political determination, and political leadership.
And future generation — well, this generation of young people are watching. Let's not let them down.
Tom Deacon, Climate Protester:
I'm 40 years old, and this (process) has been going on since I was 8 years old …. This is why I have got a banner that says, "How many COPs to arrest climate change?"
One should be the answer. Like, we should not (have to) be here at COP 26.
A draft agreement was issued in the morning on Friday. including the phase out of coal and action on the billions of dollars in subsidies to fossil fuel companies. How much aid would be provided to developing nations suffering from the present day-impacts of climate change was less clear, however.
According to the NPR report, while these negotiations were going on, a protest by local activists attending COP26 began at noon Glasgow time, including hundreds of civil society groups, NGOs, and activists from all over the world. They joined an existing demonstration on the perimeter of the conference, where speakers, protesters, and signs all demanded action.
Climate Fakers: Coal, Oil, and Gas Industries
WInding up with whatever progress could be reported, NPR came to the influence of the fossil fuel industry. As said previously, there were more representatives of that industry (500 of them) than from any country or other interest group. Information was leaking out from the conference about changes to the draft agreement presented that morning, and the smudgy fingerprints of the fossil fuel industry were becoming apparent.
Fossil fuel interests were influencing the “emissions gap”, the chasm between what emission reductions are being pledged, versus what is necessary to get down to a 1.5oC mean global temperature increase. This includes when and how fast emission decreases are accomplished as talked about above. The status of the 1.5oC target? One minister today said, “The target of 1.5oC is hanging on by its fingernails”.
What about the $500 million in subsidies that governments give every year to oil and gas companies? The language in the draft report issued that morning was a little fuzzy (ed. Fossil fuel lobbyists again?).
On aid to the developing world, attendees couldn’t even agree on how much had already been given of the $100 billion promised. Governments reported they have failed by about $20 billion, while Oxfam, an economic/social justice NGO, estimates the shortage is almost $80 billion.
Finally, what about that other emissions gap: the difference between what is being reported versus what is actually happening? No mention of that at all, though the ability to do so via remote sensing by satellite has been reported on previously in these pages. Another thing not mentioned was any potential greenhouse gas emission impacts on or by agriculture, which amounts to about 25% of greenhouse gas emissions.
Alert: COP26 Goes Into Overtime
Apparently the negotiations are still stuck on coal and money. A coal phaseout would be particularly troublesome to Australia and India. The next update to the final conference draft will come at 8 a.m. Glasgow time.
A Final Word From Bill McKibben
From late this afternoon Eastern time in an email from Bill McKibben (emphases mine):
There’s nothing very hopeful, as of this writing, about the text emerging in the final days. At the moment it expresses “deep regret” that the rich countries have not made good on their financial promises to the poor ones; it’s gone from talking about phasing out coal to phasing out “unabated coal,” code for continuing to build vast and wasteful carbon capture schemes; and from talking about ending fossil fuel subsidies to ending “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies, which is one of those words that will doubtless hide a multitude of sins. And on the deepest question—how much and how fast we’re planning to cut the emissions heating the planet—there’s been no real advance. The computer modelers estimate that the new promises have knocked about a tenth of a degree off the ultimate warming trajectory, leaving us headed for about 2.5 degrees Celsius, which is way too much.
Afterward
It’s so easy to see the negative in the past two weeks of climate negotiations at COP26 when then need to do something drastic is becoming more and more clear. I’m going to ask for some positive results that they are aware of that came out of the conference, if possible.
Thanks for reading.