Climate Change: What Does the Science Actually Say, And What Should We Be Doing Now?
Photo: People on a flooded Brooklyn street, Sept 29, 2023. Yuki Iwamura, The Washington Post
According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) we still have a narrow window to keep global warming from going above the 1.5°C target. Concerning, but not alarming. However, according to Global Warming in the Pipeline, published by a high powered team of scientists that includes James Hansen, that goal is “dead as a doornail.” They believe the 2°C target is only possible with urgent and extreme action, including many trillion dollars invested annually in carbon removal. James Hansen, the scientist who effectively launched climate change into public awareness with his 1988 testimony before a congressional committee, is definitely sounding the alarm loudly now.
Their analysis is built on updating models with new data about historic temperatures, current observations and modeling the impact of reduced atmospheric aerosols. Aerosols contribute to planetary cooling, but also to respiratory disease. In reducing sulfur and other air pollution since 2015, we have inadvertently altered the energy balance of the planet. Considerably more energy is now coming into the planet than is going out, resulting in a dramatic acceleration in warming. Hansen points out that these are scientific observations, not theories. We are going to cross the 1.5°C threshold within a few months according to the new study’s findings. And temperatures will remain above that threshold, with the possible exception of a dip down to 1.4 or 1.3°C caused briefly by the next La Niña.
Hansen is strongly urging that “the public, especially young people, need to understand and protect their home planet.” In an article discussing the new paper, he expresses concern that the scientific community is shying away from discussing the real risks, and as a result appropriate actions will not be forthcoming. In a webinar hosted by The UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Hansen replied to a question about climate tipping points, by pointing to the risk posed by the Thwaites Glacier in West Antarctica. At its current rate of melting, we have only 20 years before it will stop holding back the bulk of the West Antarctic ice shelf. When that happens catastrophic sea level rise will inundate 50% of the globe's major cities.
Reading and listening to Hansen and his colleagues I am struck by how much the prevailing conversation is still focused on the 1.5°C target, and how much of the action and commitments, especially around expectations for the upcoming COP28, are in essence tinkering around the edges. Almost no one is fully addressing the urgency and scale of the problem. This is what has Hansen concerned, and sets him apart from others in the scientific community.
Perception is slow to change, but climate change is not slow. The frequency and severity of climate catastrophes are clearly rising, and the conversation about climate impacts is getting louder. Climate change is suddenly shifting from something happening “over there” or “in the future” to something happening here, now. At this point the majority of the world’s population has a personal story of their experience of the impacts. But processing these changes, waking up to the urgency and driving the required actions, that is a slow process. People don’t usually adjust their views abruptly. It takes time for things to sink in. And time is something we do not have.
Global emissions reductions are slowed by the influence of fossil fuel companies and others who benefit from the status quo. Much of the world’s populace is looking to fossil fuels to improve their standard of living. There is a prevailing idea that we can’t abruptly stop using fossil fuels. Interest in carbon capture, or negative emissions, is being looked at as a possible solution. But new technologies are slow to deploy and costly at the scale required. Especially if we have already crossed over the 1.5°C threshold and are quickly progressing toward 2°C.
According to Hansen, within the next few years the world needs to get serious about cooling the planet. To do this, we need ways to reflect solar energy before it warms the earth further. Absent a major volcanic eruption, that requires geo-engineering. Despite its risks, perhaps it is time to begin to seriously consider such solutions. For example, Hansen mentions seeding clouds with salt from sea water to make them more reflective. Or putting aerosols into the stratosphere. Either these, or other approaches, could buy us time to implement the truly exciting, sustainable and life-affirming solutions just now being developed. To quote Andrew Boyd, “I want a better catastrophe.” Perhaps geo-engineering can be a part of that. Perhaps some of the other innovations that give me hope on a daily basis will be as well. Along with actions from all of us who are struggling to come to grips with this reality and chart our way through it.
Much food for thought. And perhaps we can each use it as fuel for action. Ask yourself, as I am, how can I stay informed (sign up for the Minerva Ventures Newsletter, among others)? How can I reduce my own climate impact? How can I work to have my voice heard? Where can I get involved?
What will you do?
Resources to consider: ClimateVoice has launched a campaign to pressure big corporations to “break up” with the US Chamber of Commerce, in addition to their work rallying employees to pressure management. ThirdAct and 350.org organize citizens to act. Organizations like the Sunrise Movement support young people’s actions. We are most powerful when we join with others