With time running out, it would take proven technologies capable of removing CO2 from the air to keep us below 1.5°C.
No 2528 Posted by fw, October 6, 2019
“According to this analysis, for Canada to do its fair share to avoid 1.5°C of warming, our emissions would need to decrease 96-99 percent below current levels by the year 2030. This sharp drop may look shocking, but it is no surprise to climate experts. The world has already warmed by over 1°C and there is little time left to prevent the additional 0.5°C. Avoiding 1.5°C of global warming is mathematically possible, but not at all realistic without the development and rapid deployment of technologies to pull CO2 out of the air. … These results paint a stark picture. Despite lofty claims and aspirational goals, there is no Canadian plan consistent with avoiding 1.5°C or 2°C warming. Wherever you are on the political spectrum, the rhetoric of your party on climate change does not match the numbers.” —Simon Donner, Policy Options
Simon Donner is an associate professor of climatology at the University of British Columbia.
Below is my abridged repost of climatologist professor Donner’s analysis of the climate plans presented by four of Canada’s federal parties. Included in the repost are my added subheadings, text highlighting and minor reformatting. Omitted from my repost are Donner’s five concluding paragraphs in which he offers a couple of other actions for Canada’s federal parties to consider in addressing climate change.
To read Simon’s complete, original article, click on the following linked title.
Modelling of the different party promises on climate change shows none of the plans would hit targets to avoid a 1.5°C increase in global warming.
IPCC’s Oct. 2018 report warned we have 12 years for global warning to be kept to maximum of 1.5°C
We’ve all heard that there are 12 years left to act to avoid a climate catastrophe. What does this mean for Canada? Are any of the federal parties prepared to confront this challenge? To answer these questions, we first need to examine what that deadline does – and does not – mean.
The Nov. 4 2016 Paris Agreement agreed to limit global warming to well below 2°C and strive for 1.5°C
In the Paris Climate Agreement, the world agreed to limit global warming to well below 2°C but to also pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. These numbers are not fundamental features of Earth’s climate system. They are policy judgments, politically mediated verdicts on the levels of warming that the world considers dangerous. The lower 1.5°C value arose from years of lobbying by small island states and other developing nations that objected to the less cautious 2°C limit and to being excluded from the conversation.
IPCC’s 2018 report said world must reduce emissions by 45% by 2030 for a 2/3 chance of meeting 1.5°C target
Because of this disagreement, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was asked to write a special report specifically about the implications of the lower warming limit. That report, released in 2018, found that the world needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent by the year 2030 for a two-thirds chance of avoiding 1.5°C warming. Subtract 2018 from 2030, and you get the now famous “12 years left.”
IPCC estimated how much carbon each country could burn as part of its share of the world’s total carbon budget
To understand the implications for Canada and our coming election, we can use data straight out of that IPCC report. The IPCC has been able to estimate how much carbon the world has left to burn for a chance at avoiding different levels of warming, and each country’s share of that carbon budget.
“The key challenge is deciding how much of the carbon budget each country should have”
The key challenge is deciding how much of the carbon budget each country should have. Should it be based on a country’s present-day emissions, wealthy high-emitting countries like Canada would have more carbon to burn and leave little left for the developing world. For example, following that logic, the US, Europe, Japan and China would alone consume the entire carbon budget for 1.5°C, leaving nothing for the rest of the world. It is not a tenable approach to dividing responsibility.
“The most equitable solution is to divide the carbon budget based on population”
The most equitable solution is to divide the carbon budget based on population. This way, Canada receives a smaller portion (0.5 percent) but provides a more realistic pathway for the rest of the world.
Referring to Figure 1, below, Donner uses a two-step approach to arrive at 2030 emission estimates as presented in the platforms of Canada’s 4 federal parties – Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, and Greens
[Step 1] Using this approach, I’ve calculated future CO2 emissions trajectories compatible with Canada’s remaining carbon budget for a two-thirds chance of avoiding 1.5°C, 2°C, 3°C, and 4°C increases in global warming …
[Step 2] … and compared the results with the various party platforms and estimates for emissions in the year 2030 (figure 1). These emissions trajectories are scaled to total greenhouse gas emissions, based on recent data showing that CO2 represents 80 percent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. The dark line represents the mean trajectory for a given warming level, and the shaded area represents the uncertainty range.
RESULT — Canada must decrease its emissions 96-99 percent below current levels by 2030 to do its fair share
According to this analysis, for Canada to do its fair share to avoid 1.5°C of warming, our emissions would need to decrease 96-99 percent below current levels by the year 2030. This sharp drop may look shocking, but it is no surprise to climate experts.
ONLY REMAINING OPTION — Canada must develop and rapidly deploy technologies to pull CO2 out of the air
The world has already warmed by over 1°C and there is little time left to prevent the additional 0.5°C. Avoiding 1.5°C of global warming is mathematically possible, but not at all realistic without the development and rapid deployment of technologies to pull CO2 out of the air.
Liberal’s net zero target by 2050 unrealistic without action on three fronts
The 2°C global warming trajectories for Canada are roughly in line with the Liberal government’s recent proposal to reach net zero emissions by 2050. These trajectories require a 61-67 percent decrease in emissions by the year 2030. Achieving this goal would be unrealistic without —
Canada’s current and proposed federal policies lie within the range of what’s necessary to avoid 3°C of global warming (“Liberal policies” in figure 1), when I use modelling from Environment and Climate Change Canada submitted to the United Nations. These policies are not sufficient to meet the federal target of a 30 percent reduction below 2005 levels.
Conservative’s climate plan would put Canada on a path towards 4°C of warming
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer has said his party would stick to the existing federal target. But the Conservative Party’s climate plan document, which contains neither carbon pricing nor regulations, would place Canada in the range of a 4°C (or more) greenhouse gas emissions trajectory. This finding draws from a modelling study by economist Mark Jaccard, described in Policy Options, which estimates that the Conservative plan would lead to a 2 percent increase in emissions from 2015 to 2030. The estimated 2030 emissions are similar to that of Environment and Climate Change Canada’s “without any policies” scenario, included in its submissions to the United Nations. A separate study by EnviroEconomics estimates a 13 percent decrease by 2030 under the Conservative Party plan, in the range of a 3 to 4°C warming trajectory.
While NDP and Green plans are consistent with a 2°C trajectory, neither include explanatory modelling data
The New Democratic Party’s proposed targets for 2030 (38 percent reduction below 2005 levels) and those of the Green Party (60 percent reduction below 2005 levels) are more stringent than the current federal target, with the Green Party’s target closest to being consistent with a 2°C trajectory. However, no party platform includes modelling that shows how these targets would be achieved.
BOTTOM LINE — there is no federal party plan consistent with avoiding 1.5°C or 2°C warming
These results paint a stark picture. Despite lofty claims and aspirational goals, there is no Canadian plan consistent with avoiding 1.5°C or 2°C warming. Wherever you are on the political spectrum, the rhetoric of your party on climate change does not match the numbers.
FAIR USE NOTICE – For details click here