TICK TOCK THE CLIMATE CLOCK PART TWENTY-FIVE

This one is going to be a little dry.  But to avoid getting inundated like a coastal city, sometimes you have to go dry.  I'm referring to the UN Gap Emissions Report 2019, which came out at the end of November.  Warning:  The news is bleak.  Nonetheless, you really should know what's in the Gap Report, so here’s a primer.  

What is the emissions gap?  From the link to the Executive Summary of the Gap Report Gap Report Exec Summary :

This is the tenth edition of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Emissions Gap Report. It provides the latest assessment of scientific studies on current and estimated future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and compares these with the emission levels permissible for the world to progress on a least-cost pathway to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. This difference between “where we are likely to be and where we need to be” has become known as the ‘emissions gap’.

Where do we need to be?  The Paris Agreement signatories agreed that by 2030, the number of gigatons of greenhouse gas emissions, sometimes referred to as the “climate budget,” must be kept to levels (as measured against pre-industrial levels) that will increase the world’s atmospheric temperature by no more than 2°C, and preferably by no more than 1.5°C by the end of the century.  

What is a greenhouse gas? A greenhouse gas absorbs and emits radiant energy, i.e. heat. The primary greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, chlorofluorocarbons, and hydro-fluorocarbons.  

What’s in the Gap Report?   Per the UN Environment Program (Resources ):

The report presents the latest data on the expected gap in 2030 for the 1.5°C and 2°C temperature targets of the Paris Agreement. It considers different scenarios, from no new climate policies since 2005 to full implementation of all national commitments under the Paris Agreement. For the first time, it looks at how large annual cuts would need to be from 2020 to 2030 to stay on track to meeting the Paris goals.

Where are we likely to be?  This is where it gets grim.  As you read this, remember that “we” refers to every single country on Earth.  From the UN Environment Program (10 Things to Know) :

In 10 years of producing the emissions gap report, the gap between what we should be doing and what we actually are [doing] is as wide as ever.  

On the brink of 2020, we now need to reduce emissions by 7.6 per cent every year from 2020 to 2030. If we do not, we will miss a closing moment in history to limit global warming to 1.5°C.  If we do nothing beyond our current, inadequate commitments to halt climate change, temperatures can be expected to rise 3.2°C above pre-industrial levels, with devastating effect. 

You might want to read that last sentence again:  

“If we do nothing beyond our current, inadequate commitments to halt climate change, temperatures can be expected to rise 3.2°C above pre-industrial levels.”

That’s an increase of 6°F by 2100.  And don’t forget, that’s a global average.  Some regions, like the Arctic and Antarctic, which are already warming faster than average rates, could see even bigger increases.

Why are the annual reduction targets important?  Again from the link to 10 Things to Know :

Ten years ago, if countries had acted on this science, governments would have needed to reduce emissions by 3.3 per cent each year. Today, we need to reduce emissions by 7.6 per cent each year. By just 2025 the cut needed will steepen to 15.5 per cent each year. Every day we delay, the more extreme, difficult and expensive the cuts become. Explore further here.

Who’s responsible for these GHG emissions?  Per 10 Things to Know :

G20 nations collectively account for 78 per cent of all emissions, but only five G20 members (the EU and four individual members) have committed to long-term zero emission targets, … The top four emitters (China, USA, EU28 and India) contribute to over 55 per cent of the total emissions over the last decade, excluding emissions from land-use change such as deforestation. If land-use change emissions were included, the rankings would change, with Brazil likely to be the largest emitter. The largest share of emissions comes from the energy sector and its fossil fuel emissions. Industry produces the next largest footprint, followed by forestry, transport, agriculture and buildings. Explore more here.

What do we have to do?  Per 10 Things to Know:

Climate change can still be limited to 1.5°C degrees. We must halve our emissions by 2030—this will take a 7.6 per cent cut in emissions every year from 2020. The good news is that we have the technology and science to decarbonize our energy sources, transport systems and cities. We have the knowledge to halt deforestation and scale reforestation. And these actions are affordable today. 

A full decarbonization of the energy sector is necessary and possible. Renewables and energy efficiency are critical to the energy transition. The potential emission reduction thanks to renewable energy electricity totals 12.1 gigatons by 2050. That’s equivalent to the annual output of nearly two and a half million coal power stations: more than are operating in the world today. Electrification of transport could reduce the sector’s CO2 emissions by a huge 72 per cent by 2050.

What are a snowball’s chances in Hell?  There are some facts cited in the Gap Report that make me think we won't get our shit together in time to avert a climate disaster with attendant mass extinction of species (including us):

• Instead of decreasing, GHG emissions have grown by 1.5% every year in the last decade.
• Instead of decreasing, fossil GHG emissions from energy use and industry, which are dominant causes of emissions, grew 2% in 2018.
• Rather than leveling out, much less decreasing, there is no sign of GHG emissions peaking in the next few years.
•  Seven G20 countries (remember, the G20 produces 78% of GHG emissions) are not on track to meet their 2030 commitments, and it’s not possible to say for three others.  So, in all likelihood, at least half of the G20 is failing.
• All countries must increase their NDC (nationally determined contributions) commitments threefold to achieve the well below 2°C goal and more than fivefold to achieve the 1.5°C goal.
• Decarbonizing the global economy will require “fundamental structural changes,” as in:  imagine and then embrace a world without petroleum and plastic.

Why the proverbial (and actual) snowball is melting.  This is what the Gap Report recommends the US do to meet its commitment in the Paris Agreement, the same agreement the Trump Administration has begun to pull out of.  If you’ve been keeping up, I think you’ll agree that the current administration has acted exactly counter to each and every one of these UN recommendations.

• Introduce regulations on power plants, clean energy standards and carbon pricing to achieve an electricity supply that is 100 per cent carbon-free.
• Implement carbon pricing on industrial emissions.
• Strengthen vehicle and fuel economy standards to be in line with zero emissions for new cars in 2030.
• Implement clean building standards so that all new buildings are 100 per cent electrified by 2030.

The Gap Report says, 

“These [climate] actions are affordable today.  What it takes is commitment. Commitment from governments, backed by their citizens.”

But are these climate measures really affordable?  In the case of the US, perhaps they are, on a national level, but money isn't evenly distributed throughout the US, and income/wealth inequality is growing.  Will the federal government commit to step into the breach and support individuals in an era of increasing partisanship?  To be specific, will the family who can't afford an electric vehicle get a federal subsidy to buy one?  

And that's just the US picture.  Consider the implications on a world-wide level, and we must, because the climate crisis is a global crisis.  Will citizens around the world see the need to convince their governments to commit to pool their economic resources to achieve a common climate goal?  Will the truck driver in France, the gas pipeline worker in Ukraine, the fisherman in Peru, the nurse in Budapest, and the hedge fund manager in the US agree to share their wealth?  Will there be sufficient citizen commitment to force governments to act?

I fear not.  I just don't see a sense of shared sacrifice or the political will materializing next year.  Because next year--less than a month away--is when we have to reduce emissions by 7.6% every year thereafter in order to have a prayer of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Unfortunately, I don't think people will act until Wall Street is under water, it's too hot and dry to grow anything in Guatemala, and Tahiti is a vacation memory.  

But that's just my opinion.  Give me a jingle if you see any signs of hope.  

Keep it real!

Marilyn