IPCC AR6 - What we do in the next 7 years and the future of our youngest
José Miguel Salazar 沙米格, CESGA®
PwC Sustainability Services Manager | GRI Stakeholder Council Member | CFA Climate Risk, Valuation and Investing | GARP SCR® | SASB FSA | Greenbiz 30 Under 30
*The following are largely excerpts from the IPCC’s AR6 Synthesis report.
The IPCC's Sixth Assessment (AR6) Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023 was launched last week. Though the report shines a spotlight on our best options to remain hopeful, overall it is a very grim reading. As a sustainability professional, the key messages are hardly new.
But as a father of a four-year old what hits the most is the stark reminder from Figure SPM.1 (c), which illustrates the adverse impacts along the lifespan of three generations (born in 1950, 1980, and 2020), how these impacts will keep amplifying and what the future would look like for my daughter and her generation should we fail to address climate change.
A radical shift has been long overdue, but fortunately we have what we need to design a better path going forward. More below.
What you need to know about the report
The AR6 Synthesis Report summarizes the results of six global reports produced with best available science from 2018 - 2023 or IPCC’s 6th report cycle). Among these, there is the landmark Global Warming of 1.5°C (2018), which has been instrumental in accelerating global ambition in a short-time.
In AR6, the IPCC essentially restates with very solid evidence and consensus what has already been clearly conveyed to global leaders for decades. But what is different is the FINAL WARNING alert to take urgent and ambitious action now. Otherwise the world will risk securing the opportunity to stay within +1.5°C.
(Note: Limiting global warming to no more than 1.5°C compared to pre-industrial revolution levels represents a key tipping point which global climate scientists urge us not to exceed to avoid major irreversible impacts.)
As the next report cycle, the Seventh Assessment Report, is not expected before at least 2027-2028, we are not going to have this time again before the window of opportunity to stay within +1.5°C closes permanently.
Limiting global warming to 1.5°C - Where do we go from here
“We are walking when we should be sprinting” - IPCC chair Hoesung Lee
As of now there are no current credible pathways to stay within 1.5°C by 2100. In fact, we are on track to overshoot up to 3.2°C or more. Plus, we are racing against time. The IPCC finds that there is a more than 50% chance that we will reach or surpass 1.5°C before 2040. Under high-emissions models, the world may even surpass the mark sooner (2030-2035). We are certainly not looking good on projections.
Yet it is still possible to transition towards a net-zero economy. With 90% of global GDP and 80% of the human population covered by a net zero pledge pending to be delivered, we are just getting started.
The economic case for action remains as solid as ever: decarbonization offers new growth opportunities, the cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of action and every fraction of a degree makes an exponential difference. Would it be wise to stop pursuing decarbonization efforts when we just started building the momentum?
In the most optimistic scenarios, where we stay within 1.5°C, GHG emissions should peak immediately or by 2025 at the latest. Moreover, emissions should be reduced by 43% by 2030 and by 60% by 2035, relative to 2019 levels. This will require huge and unprecedented levels of investment, from governments and the private sector.
Such financing mechanisms exist, the challenge lies in how to enable them? And how to redirect finance to high-impact areas?
There are many feasible and available economic opportunities
Fortunately, the IPCC identifies a range of sectoral opportunities to scale up climate action. They also add very useful pieces of information such as net lifetime costs and emission reduction potential (ERP) demonstrating that effective, and low-cost options are already available.
Furthermore, generally speaking there are some solutions with more mature technologies able to deliver larger reduction compared to others. For instance in the table below you can compare the differences between solar and wind against nuclear, and carbon capture and storage (CCS).
Where should we focus our work in the short-term?
Looking at the near-term, the IPCC lists several priority responses, such as:
Recommended by LinkedIn
The above should be viewed as our core evaluation criteria on how we pursue any kind of development. How much, how fast and whether we progress or not on each of these actions will be critical to the success of a net zero and just transition.
Certainly changing course won’t be easy. Even with early warnings decades ahead our current system has severely failed to deliver. Major systemic changes will be required to address this wicked problem in a meaningful way.
So, what can we do as individuals?
As with nations, as individuals we also have multiple feasible options available such as in the image below.
Some of them have significantly higher impacts than others, for instance cutting meat consumption or reducing air travel. But most of these left to their own devices, would hardly exercise the extent of systemic change required to make a difference to take us to within 1.5°C on time. What we need is to decarbonise the high-emitting entities and make it mandatory, not optional.
In order to exercise systemic change, an extremely important and overlooked area at our disposal is through our role as citizens and our ability to influence public policy-making.
Why climate governance and policies matter
“Effective climate action requires political commitment, well-aligned multi-level governance and institutional frameworks, laws, policies and strategies. It needs clear goals, adequate finance and financing tools, coordination across multiple policy domains, and inclusive governance processes.” - IPCC AR6 Synthesis report (p.78)
Though each near-term priority response listed by the IPCC is very important on its own, and interrelates with others, “Governance and policies” is the one which can play a multiplier effect serving as the foundation for coordinated action.
As we are seeing in the EU with the European Green Deal, in Taiwan with the Climate Change Response Act (氣候變遷因應法) and elsewhere, enshrining net-zero emissions in climate-relevant laws provides a clear and coherent commitment in different areas of the economy. And most importantly, these types of provisions make systemic change MANDATORY.
These functions can be further promoted by sector-specific roadmaps and other instruments to help redirect finance and tech to deliver mitigation outcomes and adaptation benefits. Such conditions can enable transformation and are available today. At the minimum, we should be urging our governments and elected leaders everywhere to strengthen climate governance and policies. This alone won’t be enough but it is certainly a precondition to achieve the best case scenarios.
So, a key question for all of us is: How much do we want to engage? And why?
A few years ago, I read “The Future We Choose: Surviving the Climate Crisis” by Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac who led the negotiations of the Climate Paris Agreement. In the book the authors talk about their experience driving such a complex process and argue for confronting the climate crisis head-on, with determination and optimism.
Using the IPCC scenarios, they lay out what the future would look like should we fail to address the climate crisis (Spoilers: A pretty scary world). But they also lay out what a net zero, regenerative and more equal world could be. Lots of other good books and publications have also shaped my thinking, but I bring out this one, as I firmly believe determination and optimism precede action.
The state of progress certainly hits me, but it also strengthens my sense of responsibility towards my daughter and her generation.
Based on the estimates, the disruption we've seen in our lives is only about half dependent on our choices. For her generation the majority of disruption will be dependent on our choices in the coming years. Now there is still a window to take coordinated action and every effort would matter.
Less than seven years and counting…the challenge is (still) on.
Net zero by 2040? The next accelerator?👀
UN Secretary-General António Guterres is responding to the report's urgency by calling for industrialized countries to move up their net zero emissions targets from 2050 to "as close as possible to 2040." (would this rise to the challenge and be the next major global campaign?)
Source: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023
#IPCC #ARC6 #ClimateChange #SustainableDevelopment #ClimateTech #FutureofCEE #ClimateActionNow #SystemsThinking
Disclaimer: The content in this article is based on the latest findings of the IPCC’s AR6 synthesis report 2023. The views expressed on this article are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.
Please comment and share if you find it useful.
Lawyer | CAMS | Senior Associate -PwC Polska
1yThank you so much for sharing this! Very precise and easy to read. 👏Certainly is sad to see how after these last years, global leaders do not react. Let’s hope for the changes when it is still in time.