The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was approved by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in Incheon, South Korea, on Oct 8. Limiting global warming to 1.5°C, as opposed to 2°C, would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society. However, setting the new, ambitious target is imperative given the increasing dangers that ecosystems and human health face.
The panel decided to draft the special report in October 2016, at the request of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement adopted by 195 nations in December 2015 proposed pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
On the 1.5°C target that had previously been the subject of debate, the flagship report assessed the possibility, examined pathways available and proposed ways of linking it to the Sustainable Development Goals. It found that a series of actions need to be taken immediately to transform the ways of dealing with land, energy, industry, buildings, transport and cities.
The transition would be tough, but the state of ecosystems and the future of human beings make such a move imperative. We already know only too well the consequences of a 1°C rise in global average temperatures – more extreme weather, rising sea levels and shrinking Arctic sea ice. More serious impacts can be avoided by capping global warming to 1.5°C instead of 2°C. For instance, by 2100, with global warming of 1.5°C rather than 2°C the global sea level rise would be 10 cm lower than it otherwise would be. The likelihood of an Arctic Ocean free of sea ice in summer would be once a century with global warming of 1.5°C, but at least once a decade with 2°C. And the coral reefs would decline by 70-90 percent with global warming of 1.5°C, whereas virtually all (> 99 percent) would be lost with 2°C.
To cap warming within 1.5°C, global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide would need to fall about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching net zero by about 2050. This means that any remaining emissions would need to be balanced by removing CO2 from the air.
There will be only a decade or more left for us to reduce CO2 emissions from 40 billion tons at present by 45 percent in 2030, and to achieve near zero emissions in 2050. Such a transformation requires unprecedented efforts by human society and poses huge challenges. This is why many people think it is unrealistic to achieve the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
I used to be one of the skeptics until I was invited to take part in drafting the report as a lead author of Chapter II at the beginning of last year. About the same time we began research on emissions reduction pathways for the 1.5°C global warming target in China, which was completed early this year. Over a year and more a lot of modeling and positive research results allowed me to reflect on my previous assumptions. I believe realizing the very ambitious goal is possible, but it would require great courage to formulate strategies and corresponding policies.
After 30 years of scientific research human beings have become increasingly more certain about climate change, and global society has come to realize that preventing climate change is not about politics, but about the looming challenges we as humans all face.
At a global level, countries are engaged in more collaboration through dialogue and negotiations as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The debate used to be about whether or not we should reduce emissions, but now it is about the degree to which emissions should be cut and how that can be done.
There have, of course, been differences of opinion and disputes among countries on this issue, which is only to be expected given the divergence in social, economic and development in each, but it should be noted that the consensus is growing. The approval of this report is a salient example. Disagreements over emissions reduction pathways were limited and agreement has been reached; with previous assessment reports, pathways were always a matter of heated debate.
Public awareness has been raised significantly, and everyone is now concerned about climate change, willing to make their own contribution to deal with it. Many people choose to live a low-carbon lifestyle in commuting and consumption, by using energy-efficient appliances and saving water, and some choose the vegetarian path, such is their care for the environment.
More importantly, science has advanced at a speed that is hard to credit, helping to greatly cut costs and give birth to low-carbon technologies. In China, for example, scientists have developed state-of-the-art technologies in renewable energy (wind power and photovoltaic power), electric vehicles, power batteries and energy storage batteries, nuclear power and low-temperature nuclear heating technology. All of these make it more possible to reduce CO2 emissions significantly in the future.
On the other hand, large-amplitude, rapid reduction of emissions will have negative impacts on industries, especially those with high emissions. If the 1.5°C target is realized, fossil energy industries will shrink markedly by 2050.
Furthermore, as the transformation will happen over a short period, some problems such as unemployment and industry upgrading will become acute. So China needs to be extremely prudent when formulating explicit and ambitious climate change strategies by bearing in mind industrial transformation and upgrading.
Twenty-four years have passed since I first took part in drafting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report as a reviewer, and thereafter I was involved in drafting each report.
Previous assessment reports had a life cycle of four to five years, whereas we had to complete this special report on global warming of 1.5°C in just 18 months. Work on a draft began early last year, and the panel invited 91 authors from 44 countries, including 14 coordinating lead authors, 60 lead authors and 17 review editors. The report was eventually issued after internal reviews, external expert reviews and government reviews, with a total of 42,001 expert and government review comments.
Helping draft IPCC reports has been a great experience, giving me the opportunity to work with the best scientists in different fields from various countries and regions. Professor William Nordhaus, who took part in the study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report in 1996, has just won the Nobel Prize in Economics, which is a great encouragement to all of us working in this regard.
Jiang Kejun is a research fellow at Energy Research Institute, National Development and Reform Commission, and a lead author of the the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C. The author contributed this article to China Watch exclusively. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of China Watch.
All rights reserved. Copying or sharing of any content for other than personal use is prohibited without prior written permission.
Jiang Kejun
The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was approved by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in Incheon, South Korea, on Oct 8. Limiting global warming to 1.5°C, as opposed to 2°C, would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society. However, setting the new, ambitious target is imperative given the increasing dangers that ecosystems and human health face.
The panel decided to draft the special report in October 2016, at the request of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement adopted by 195 nations in December 2015 proposed pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
On the 1.5°C target that had previously been the subject of debate, the flagship report assessed the possibility, examined pathways available and proposed ways of linking it to the Sustainable Development Goals. It found that a series of actions need to be taken immediately to transform the ways of dealing with land, energy, industry, buildings, transport and cities.
The transition would be tough, but the state of ecosystems and the future of human beings make such a move imperative. We already know only too well the consequences of a 1°C rise in global average temperatures – more extreme weather, rising sea levels and shrinking Arctic sea ice. More serious impacts can be avoided by capping global warming to 1.5°C instead of 2°C. For instance, by 2100, with global warming of 1.5°C rather than 2°C the global sea level rise would be 10 cm lower than it otherwise would be. The likelihood of an Arctic Ocean free of sea ice in summer would be once a century with global warming of 1.5°C, but at least once a decade with 2°C. And the coral reefs would decline by 70-90 percent with global warming of 1.5°C, whereas virtually all (> 99 percent) would be lost with 2°C.
To cap warming within 1.5°C, global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide would need to fall about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching net zero by about 2050. This means that any remaining emissions would need to be balanced by removing CO2 from the air.
There will be only a decade or more left for us to reduce CO2 emissions from 40 billion tons at present by 45 percent in 2030, and to achieve near zero emissions in 2050. Such a transformation requires unprecedented efforts by human society and poses huge challenges. This is why many people think it is unrealistic to achieve the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
I used to be one of the skeptics until I was invited to take part in drafting the report as a lead author of Chapter II at the beginning of last year. About the same time we began research on emissions reduction pathways for the 1.5°C global warming target in China, which was completed early this year. Over a year and more a lot of modeling and positive research results allowed me to reflect on my previous assumptions. I believe realizing the very ambitious goal is possible, but it would require great courage to formulate strategies and corresponding policies.
After 30 years of scientific research human beings have become increasingly more certain about climate change, and global society has come to realize that preventing climate change is not about politics, but about the looming challenges we as humans all face.
At a global level, countries are engaged in more collaboration through dialogue and negotiations as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The debate used to be about whether or not we should reduce emissions, but now it is about the degree to which emissions should be cut and how that can be done.
There have, of course, been differences of opinion and disputes among countries on this issue, which is only to be expected given the divergence in social, economic and development in each, but it should be noted that the consensus is growing. The approval of this report is a salient example. Disagreements over emissions reduction pathways were limited and agreement has been reached; with previous assessment reports, pathways were always a matter of heated debate.
Public awareness has been raised significantly, and everyone is now concerned about climate change, willing to make their own contribution to deal with it. Many people choose to live a low-carbon lifestyle in commuting and consumption, by using energy-efficient appliances and saving water, and some choose the vegetarian path, such is their care for the environment.
More importantly, science has advanced at a speed that is hard to credit, helping to greatly cut costs and give birth to low-carbon technologies. In China, for example, scientists have developed state-of-the-art technologies in renewable energy (wind power and photovoltaic power), electric vehicles, power batteries and energy storage batteries, nuclear power and low-temperature nuclear heating technology. All of these make it more possible to reduce CO2 emissions significantly in the future.
On the other hand, large-amplitude, rapid reduction of emissions will have negative impacts on industries, especially those with high emissions. If the 1.5°C target is realized, fossil energy industries will shrink markedly by 2050.
Furthermore, as the transformation will happen over a short period, some problems such as unemployment and industry upgrading will become acute. So China needs to be extremely prudent when formulating explicit and ambitious climate change strategies by bearing in mind industrial transformation and upgrading.
Twenty-four years have passed since I first took part in drafting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report as a reviewer, and thereafter I was involved in drafting each report.
Previous assessment reports had a life cycle of four to five years, whereas we had to complete this special report on global warming of 1.5°C in just 18 months. Work on a draft began early last year, and the panel invited 91 authors from 44 countries, including 14 coordinating lead authors, 60 lead authors and 17 review editors. The report was eventually issued after internal reviews, external expert reviews and government reviews, with a total of 42,001 expert and government review comments.
Helping draft IPCC reports has been a great experience, giving me the opportunity to work with the best scientists in different fields from various countries and regions. Professor William Nordhaus, who took part in the study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report in 1996, has just won the Nobel Prize in Economics, which is a great encouragement to all of us working in this regard.
Jiang Kejun is a research fellow at Energy Research Institute, National Development and Reform Commission, and a lead author of the the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C. The author contributed this article to China Watch exclusively. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of China Watch.
All rights reserved. Copying or sharing of any content for other than personal use is prohibited without prior written permission.
