Unpacking the World’s Most Influential Climate Target: Was It Doomed from the Beginning?

In 2015, countries around the world came together to sign the Paris Agreement. They aimed to keep global temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, and ideally, below 1.5 degrees. Fast forward ten years, and it seems we may have already crossed that critical 1.5-degree mark.

Recent research published in Nature Climate Change shows that last year was the hottest on record, hitting 1.5 degrees Celsius. Even with natural cooling events like La Niña in play, this year started off even warmer, reaching 1.75 degrees above the preindustrial average in January.

Experts are warning that the Earth seems to have entered a troubling new phase. Since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) noted in a 2018 report that surpassing 1.5 degrees could have dire consequences, many have been on high alert. Greta Thunberg and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez famously stressed that we had just 12 years to avoid catastrophe. But are we really on the brink of disaster?

Mike Hulme, a geography professor at the University of Cambridge, believes we’re not. He argues that these temperature thresholds are arbitrary and shouldn’t dictate our understanding of climate change. For him, focusing narrowly on numbers misses the bigger picture: people care about how climate change affects their daily lives, not just abstract temperature readings.

Hulme warns that framing our efforts around strict deadlines can lead to feelings of despair and cynicism. If we believe we’ve already surpassed the 1.5-degree limit, some might think it’s too late to take meaningful action, which can be counterproductive.

During an interview, he elaborated on his concerns about the 1.5-degree target. He pointed out that it always seemed unfeasible. Activists rallied around this number, seeing it as a vital benchmark for survival. However, he cautions that an atmosphere of fear about crossing this threshold could hinder productive discussions about managing climate risks.

Hulme believes that deadlines mislead the public into thinking there’s a dramatic moment when everything changes. Climate change is incremental, and its risks need to be viewed in context with other global crises, such as pandemics and geopolitical tensions.

When discussing recent studies that suggest we might be breaching the 1.5-degree mark sooner than expected, Hulme indicates that understanding temperature data requires long-term perspectives. Traditionally, climatologists look at trends over 30 years, but more recent definitions have shifted to 20 years. He expresses concern that sensational interpretations might emerge, stressing that simply exceeding 1.5 degrees doesn’t automatically trigger new climate crises.

Ultimately, Hulme points out that climate change isn’t a problem we can solve quickly. Initial mobilization around the 1.5-degree target may have sparked urgent action, but it doesn’t help us achieve long-term climate goals. He advocates for a focus on decarbonization without unnecessary deadlines.

Instead of a ticking clock, we should frame efforts around actionable solutions and sustainable development. The U.N. Sustainable Development Goals provide a context that connects people’s well-being and the environment, ultimately encouraging patience and progress over time.

Source link

politics,language,news\/analysis,yahoo