SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"Life in the haor of Bangladesh" is the cover photo for the May 13, 2018 issue of the British Journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. (Photo: Balaram Mahalder/Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A/CC)
Showing Paris Not Enough, Studies Find 2degC Target Won't Stop 'Destructive and Deadly' Impacts of Global Warming
This crisis requires "not only climate scientists, but the whole Earth system science community, as well as economists, engineers, lawyers, philosophers, politicians, emergency planners, and others to step up."
Apr 02, 2018
A series of scientific studies published in a British journal on Monday echoes warnings from long-time critics of the Paris Agreement that meeting the accord's main goals will not be enough to prevent "destructive and deadly" impacts of the worldwide climate crisis.
The May issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A explores the challenges of working to achieve the 2015 agreement's foundational objectives, which are "to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2degC above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5degC."
While the agreement has the support of all the world's nations except the United States--President Donald Trump has vowed to withdraw from it as soon as he can--it ultimately relies on signatories to develop their own pathways for meeting the goals, which has raised concerns among experts that the global community will fail to stay below the 2degC threshold.
The new journal issue's introduction emphasizes that this "multidisciplinary challenge"--a changing planet that is expected to influence nearly or all aspects of human life--requires "not only climate scientists, but the whole Earth system science community, as well as economists, engineers, lawyers, philosophers, politicians, emergency planners, and others to step up."
Multiple studies from the journal warn that global warming is likely to exacerbate worldwide inequality, particularly in poor countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
One analysis concludes that "projected impacts on economic growth of 1.5degC warming are close to indistinguishable from current climate conditions, while 2degC warming suggests statistically lower economic growth for a large set of countries." However, those researchers found that even 1.5degC warming would likely take a notable toll on economic growth in the Tropics and Southern Hemisphere.
Another study examines how "emission pathways consistent with limiting temperature increase to 1.5degC raise pressing questions from an equity perspective," noting that "these pathways would limit impacts and benefit vulnerable communities but also present trade-offs that could increase inequality." The researchers urge policymakers to more carefully evaluate the equity implications of various proposals and outline a strategy for doing so.
Among the greatest concerns about the warming plant is how changing weather patterns, including increased drought, flooding, and heatwaves, will decrease food security.
A team of researchers led by Richard Betts, head of climate impacts research at the University of Exeter, found that the nations which will face "the greatest increase in vulnerability to food insecurity when moving from the present-day climate to 2degC global warming are Oman, India, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil."
Another team explored the long-term impacts of global warming on coastal communities, concluding that even if the goals of the Paris agreement are met within this century, "potential impacts continue to grow for centuries" and "therefore, adaptation remains essential in densely populated and economically important coastal areas under climate stabilization."
The release of these studies follows findings, published last month in Environmental Research Letters, that limiting global warming to 1.5degC above pre-industrial levels--rather than 2degC--could save the homes of an estimated 5 million people.
While this estimated difference in impact on coastal homes was considered stark by some experts, the broader takeaway from both that report and the studies published Monday is that meeting the goals outlined in the Paris agreement will not be enough to spare many millions of people from the consequences of the global climate crisis.
"People think the Paris Agreement is going to save us from harm from climate change," the earlier study's lead author, DJ Rasmussen, said in a statement. "But we show that even under the best-case climate policy being considered today, many places will still have to deal with rising seas and more frequent coastal floods."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A series of scientific studies published in a British journal on Monday echoes warnings from long-time critics of the Paris Agreement that meeting the accord's main goals will not be enough to prevent "destructive and deadly" impacts of the worldwide climate crisis.
The May issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A explores the challenges of working to achieve the 2015 agreement's foundational objectives, which are "to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2degC above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5degC."
While the agreement has the support of all the world's nations except the United States--President Donald Trump has vowed to withdraw from it as soon as he can--it ultimately relies on signatories to develop their own pathways for meeting the goals, which has raised concerns among experts that the global community will fail to stay below the 2degC threshold.
The new journal issue's introduction emphasizes that this "multidisciplinary challenge"--a changing planet that is expected to influence nearly or all aspects of human life--requires "not only climate scientists, but the whole Earth system science community, as well as economists, engineers, lawyers, philosophers, politicians, emergency planners, and others to step up."
Multiple studies from the journal warn that global warming is likely to exacerbate worldwide inequality, particularly in poor countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
One analysis concludes that "projected impacts on economic growth of 1.5degC warming are close to indistinguishable from current climate conditions, while 2degC warming suggests statistically lower economic growth for a large set of countries." However, those researchers found that even 1.5degC warming would likely take a notable toll on economic growth in the Tropics and Southern Hemisphere.
Another study examines how "emission pathways consistent with limiting temperature increase to 1.5degC raise pressing questions from an equity perspective," noting that "these pathways would limit impacts and benefit vulnerable communities but also present trade-offs that could increase inequality." The researchers urge policymakers to more carefully evaluate the equity implications of various proposals and outline a strategy for doing so.
Among the greatest concerns about the warming plant is how changing weather patterns, including increased drought, flooding, and heatwaves, will decrease food security.
A team of researchers led by Richard Betts, head of climate impacts research at the University of Exeter, found that the nations which will face "the greatest increase in vulnerability to food insecurity when moving from the present-day climate to 2degC global warming are Oman, India, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil."
Another team explored the long-term impacts of global warming on coastal communities, concluding that even if the goals of the Paris agreement are met within this century, "potential impacts continue to grow for centuries" and "therefore, adaptation remains essential in densely populated and economically important coastal areas under climate stabilization."
The release of these studies follows findings, published last month in Environmental Research Letters, that limiting global warming to 1.5degC above pre-industrial levels--rather than 2degC--could save the homes of an estimated 5 million people.
While this estimated difference in impact on coastal homes was considered stark by some experts, the broader takeaway from both that report and the studies published Monday is that meeting the goals outlined in the Paris agreement will not be enough to spare many millions of people from the consequences of the global climate crisis.
"People think the Paris Agreement is going to save us from harm from climate change," the earlier study's lead author, DJ Rasmussen, said in a statement. "But we show that even under the best-case climate policy being considered today, many places will still have to deal with rising seas and more frequent coastal floods."
A series of scientific studies published in a British journal on Monday echoes warnings from long-time critics of the Paris Agreement that meeting the accord's main goals will not be enough to prevent "destructive and deadly" impacts of the worldwide climate crisis.
The May issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A explores the challenges of working to achieve the 2015 agreement's foundational objectives, which are "to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2degC above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5degC."
While the agreement has the support of all the world's nations except the United States--President Donald Trump has vowed to withdraw from it as soon as he can--it ultimately relies on signatories to develop their own pathways for meeting the goals, which has raised concerns among experts that the global community will fail to stay below the 2degC threshold.
The new journal issue's introduction emphasizes that this "multidisciplinary challenge"--a changing planet that is expected to influence nearly or all aspects of human life--requires "not only climate scientists, but the whole Earth system science community, as well as economists, engineers, lawyers, philosophers, politicians, emergency planners, and others to step up."
Multiple studies from the journal warn that global warming is likely to exacerbate worldwide inequality, particularly in poor countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
One analysis concludes that "projected impacts on economic growth of 1.5degC warming are close to indistinguishable from current climate conditions, while 2degC warming suggests statistically lower economic growth for a large set of countries." However, those researchers found that even 1.5degC warming would likely take a notable toll on economic growth in the Tropics and Southern Hemisphere.
Another study examines how "emission pathways consistent with limiting temperature increase to 1.5degC raise pressing questions from an equity perspective," noting that "these pathways would limit impacts and benefit vulnerable communities but also present trade-offs that could increase inequality." The researchers urge policymakers to more carefully evaluate the equity implications of various proposals and outline a strategy for doing so.
Among the greatest concerns about the warming plant is how changing weather patterns, including increased drought, flooding, and heatwaves, will decrease food security.
A team of researchers led by Richard Betts, head of climate impacts research at the University of Exeter, found that the nations which will face "the greatest increase in vulnerability to food insecurity when moving from the present-day climate to 2degC global warming are Oman, India, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil."
Another team explored the long-term impacts of global warming on coastal communities, concluding that even if the goals of the Paris agreement are met within this century, "potential impacts continue to grow for centuries" and "therefore, adaptation remains essential in densely populated and economically important coastal areas under climate stabilization."
The release of these studies follows findings, published last month in Environmental Research Letters, that limiting global warming to 1.5degC above pre-industrial levels--rather than 2degC--could save the homes of an estimated 5 million people.
While this estimated difference in impact on coastal homes was considered stark by some experts, the broader takeaway from both that report and the studies published Monday is that meeting the goals outlined in the Paris agreement will not be enough to spare many millions of people from the consequences of the global climate crisis.
"People think the Paris Agreement is going to save us from harm from climate change," the earlier study's lead author, DJ Rasmussen, said in a statement. "But we show that even under the best-case climate policy being considered today, many places will still have to deal with rising seas and more frequent coastal floods."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.