“The climate emergency is not just a technological challenge. “It’s political and social.”
The third report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has made it clear that CO2 emissions continue to rise and that agreements are not being complied with. But it also brings good news: taking effective action would be cheap. We analyzed the report and the main current challenges with BC3 researcher Mikel González Egino.
What are the key points of the report, Mikel?
The IPCC says we are not on the right track to comply with the Paris agreements. in its 2018 report, it said that by 2020 remittances should have peaked and begun to decline, but the latest report shows that this has not been the case. Remittances have continued to increase, so one of the main messages is that we are not on the right track.
According to the IPCC, with the announced policies, it will increase by about 2.7°C. There is a big difference between actual data today and the reductions that should be seen if countries deliver on their pledges by 2030. It's a clear warning message. If we do not act quickly, it will not be up to us to limit the temperature to 1.5°C.
Another important message is the very unequal distribution of per capita CO2 emissions from country to country. Those who are the most economically rich have high emissions per capita, such as the United States. Other countries, instead, hardly emit CO2.
There is also good news: it would be relatively cheap to take effective measures. Before, it was supposed to be expensive, but we really have it on hand.
Yes, they believe that with the technology we have now, and with some reasonable behavioral changes, we can achieve about 80% of the reduction we have to make. Without the need for new technological innovations. Just implementing the right policies.
We already have technologies, which in many cases are cheaper than fossils. The costs of renewable energy and energy storage systems have been greatly reduced. Solar energy and batteries have reduced their costs by 80% in the last decade. IPCCk hainbat trantsizio-modu aztertu ditu, eta ondorio honetara iritsi da: gure helburuak lortzeko modurik onena da energia berriztagarriz elikatutako ekonomia elektrifikatzea eta biltegiratze-teknologiekin (bateriak...) konbinatzea.
According to the IPCC, the adjustments that the industry would have to make would not have a significant impact on the global gross domestic product expected by 2025.
Yes, an important part of the economy can be decarbonized. It is true that there are industries or sectors that are more difficult to decarbonise, such as the cement industry. It is not easy to find decarbonization routes. But these sectors are only a small part. With the technologies we have now, and with some changes in demand, a large part of the CO2 emission can be reduced. Today, the challenge is no longer in the technological field.
Where is the challenge?
The main challenge is the implementation of appropriate policies. And make the transition socially just. For example, to move towards a decarbonized scenario, policies that increase fossil fuel prices are necessary, but of course it must be done gradually. Moreover, the costs and benefits of the transition must be evenly distributed in society. Otherwise, society may feel that it is adversely affected by the energy transition, which would greatly delay the process.
Fiscal and social policies need to be implemented to support more low-income groups, who face greater difficulties in investing in cleaner new technologies. Making the transition socially acceptable and equitable is a very important element in moving forward at the pace that the IPCC demands of us.
Another big challenge is transportation, right?
Oh, yes, of course. Especially in the most economically rich countries. In the Basque Country, transport remittances are even higher than the direct remittances of the industry since 2009. they have increased by 25% in the last decade.
The IPCC says that it is necessary to create infrastructures that help people to change their lives.
This is very important. If we want a new mobility model, we need the infrastructure to do so. Otherwise, we will not have a real alternative to private transport. The solution is not to put a price on CO2, but to create an infrastructure that really makes non-carbonised mobility possible. An efficient public transport network must inevitably be designed.
On the other hand, it is important to electrify vehicles. But an infrastructure is needed for both changes to take place. Governments must ensure that such infrastructure exists. Otherwise, people will not be able to change their habits, even if they are highly committed citizens.
The report states that more compact cities should be created to reduce transport. But in many countries, the trend is the opposite.
Yeah, in many cases, we're going in the wrong direction. And the most compact urban model is essential. The consequences are seen in the US, if not. This is partly due to these differences in per capita emissions from one country to another. They show how we have shaped cities and our lifestyles. This is partly due to the fact that with a similar standard of living in Europe and the US, US emissions per capita are double. Therefore, it is essential to rethink and redesign the cities. A large part of the remittances is at stake.
Are there any other important keys in the report?
I would highlight two things. On the one hand, the report pays attention to the excessive expectation in CO2 absorption technologies. In fact, the IPCC is saying that emissions should have peaked by now and that, by 2050, we should have zero net emissions if we want to meet the goal of increasing only 1.5°C. But a net zero emission means that we will have a small positive emission that we may be able to compensate by absorbing CO2. An important message of the IPCC is that its CO2 absorption capacity is more limited than previously thought. Natural (forest...) and artificial (CO2 capture technology) systems lack the ability to absorb emissions.
We cannot, therefore, postpone the emission reductions on the assumption that we will absorb them. Remittances must be reduced as much as possible, and we must bear in mind that we can only compensate those who are absolutely impossible to reduce.
And the second is a positive message: 24 countries have already achieved, for 10 consecutive years, a steady decline in remittances. This proves that there have already been technologies, and that if the right policies are implemented and maintained, we can see real restrictions.
Buletina
Bidali zure helbide elektronikoa eta jaso asteroko buletina zure sarrera-ontzian