Copenhagen: We must act now on sound science

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

---

Professor Katherine Richardson, Chair of the Scientific Steering Committee for the IARU Congress Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions, University of Copenhagen

The scientific discussion as to whether climate change is occurring and whether human activities are significantly contributing to this change is essentially over. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported in 2007 that climate change is without doubt occurring, and estimated that there is an over 90% probability that human activities – the most important of these being the burning of fossil fuels and the felling of natural vegetation cover – are the primary cause of climate change. A synthesis (http://climatecongress.ku.dk/pdf/synthesisreport) of research results obtained after the preparation of the 2007 IPCC Report indicates that a number of climate indicators are changing near or above the upper boundary indicated in the IPCC range of projections. Those indicators changing more rapidly than projected include sea level rise, ocean temp­erature and the extent of Arctic sea ice. Thus, in the scientific community, the overwhelming conviction found is that human activities are impacting the climate and that the climate system is changing very rapidly.

Alas, this is not the case in the general public or in the political arena. One of the causes of this mismatch between scientific and popular opinion on climate change most certainly is the media, who, for the most part, still continue to treat climate change as a risk question: 'Will it happen or not?' In fact, climate change is a risk issue: 'How great a risk are we as a society willing to take when it comes to climate change?' Most estimates indicate that unchecked emissions of greenhouse gases will lead to a global average temperature increase by 2100 of about 5ºC. The consequences of such a temperature rise are predicted to be staggering: vast areas would become flooded, violent storms would be common in many regions and huge numbers of people would lose their access to freshwater and food. Hundreds of millions of people (some estimates say over one billion) would become 'climate migrants' and mass extinction of many organisms on Earth would occur.

Of course, no one knows 'for certain' that these will be the consequences of climate change, but then no one knows 'for certain' that there will be an accident at an atomic power plant, that a bridge will collapse or that there will be a terror attack at an airport. Nevertheless, despite the lack of certainty in the case of the nuclear plant, bridge and airport, society invests great sums to minimise the risk of such events occurring. Given the potential risks associated with climate change, it is difficult to understand why it is so difficult to mobilise resources to minimise them.

Constraining global warming to a maximum of 2ºC above pre-industrial levels has become a de facto political goal with respect to climate change. The IPCC as well as more recent scientific reports indicate that, even with temperature rises less that 2º, impacts will be significant for some societies and ecosystems. Given the inertia in the climate system, scientists predict that – even if all human greenhouse emissions ceased today – the planet is locked into a temperature increase of about 1.4º. Thus, to constrain global temperature rise to a maximum of 2º requires a massive reduction in CO2 emissions, and we are not talking here about reductions that take place in the far distant future. Most studies indicate that the peak in global emissions must be reached within about the next decade if the 2º guardrail is to be respected. Since 2000, the global emission of CO2 from human activities has been increasing by over 3% per year. Such are the grim realities facing negotiators at the upcoming COP-15 in Copenhagen.

---

Wilfried Haeberli, Director, World Glacier Monitoring Service, Geography Department, University of Zurich

Even small changes in atmos­pheric temperatures can have strong impacts on high mount­ain regions. This already became visible following 20th Century global warming by about 0.5 to 1ºC. Worldwide shrink­ing of mountain glaciers, for instance, is among the clearest sign in nature for rapid changes in the global climate system. A future global temperature rise by 2ºC envisaged as a goal of international climate policy not only involves a continuation of such developments but allows for an acceleration in the rate of change. On continents, warming is likely to be considerably stronger than the global average, ie. around 3 to 4ºC in mid-latitude high mountain ranges with the envisaged future scenario. This will inevitably cause grave consequences with effects reaching far beyond remote ice-clad peaks.

The impacts of even stronger warming would be dramatic. Within the coming decades, glaciers will greatly reduce in size and in many cases almost completely disappear in many mountain ranges. The seasonality of runoff in vast areas surrounding mountains will dramatically change due to combined effects of less snow storage in winter, earlier snowmelt in spring and reduced glacier melt in summer. Decreasing resources on the supply side in combination with increasing needs on the demand side will more and more affect economics and living conditions for over a billion people who depend on meltwater from high mountain ranges. A new science of growing disequilibria in complex systems must be built up, requiring integrated analysis and monitoring of important components in nature and society. This is an enormous challenge with progress in time having its limits. Rapid deceleration of change is, therefore, a must to keep scientific understanding as a fundamentally important basis for dealing with living conditions on Earth.

The example of changing meltwater supply during dry seasons for an important part of humanity also involves the potential development of serious conflicts about the use of water: who owns it and who will decide on priorities of its use? Rapid dec­eleration of change is therefore also urgent in view of keeping enough time and degrees of freedom for developing acceptable solutions. Once glaciers have shrunk to small sizes or even disappeared completely, their meltwater cannot come back soon – an irrepar­able damage for future generations. Heating up high mountain regions leads to much more than just a regrettable loss of beauty. Some old cultures of mountain inhabitants had a saying that the melting of perennial snow and ice on their highest summits indicates the end of the world. It could be wise to carefully consider this deeply felt traditional view.

---

Will Day, Chair, Sustainable Development Commission (SDC)

Using sound science responsibly' is one of the five principles of the UK's sustainable develop­ment framework, and this approach is exemplified in the attempt to tackle climate change. The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) stresses the importance of climate science in defining the nature of the problem. A firm grasp of how and why the climate is changing must underpin any attempt to tackle the causes and adapt to the effects. (The difficulties of predicting these, and the scale of the threat, require us to adopt the precautionary principle.) Achieving the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions will require radical action, and the govern­ment's target of an 80% reduction in CO2 below 1990 levels by 2050 will require a transformation in the way we live, and will mean applying sound science across the board, including the obvious areas such as energy-efficient buildings and low-carbon transport.

Announcing the UK's Low Carbon Transition Plan, Ed Miliband recently spoke of the government's plans to promote electric cars, smart grids and smart meters. Exciting new tech­nologies are on the horizon. For example, the SDC's recent 'Breakthroughs for the 21st Century' report highlighted the use of algae to capture carbon emissions from power stations. Such innovations could yield significant results, but new technology alone is unlikely to deal with the challenge. Many of the solutions already exist, and will need to be developed and massively scaled up. Vitally, success will depend on us all in making changes to the way we live. Businesses can also help solve many of the problems of climate change, but the role of government to remove barriers to innovation and to create incentives is key. To succeed, the UK needs to 'get it right' at every stage – creating the right climate for innovation, research and development through support and market development. We haven't always done this well. For example, in wind power we were overtaken by the Danes. Investment will be critical, and the recently announced UK Low Carbon Industrial Strategy takes some steps to address this, including allocating some of the £405m announced for green industry and technology in the budget to boost wave, tidal and offshore wind energy. The SDC will continue to advise government on how to tackle climate change, and to base that advice on sound science. We ignore scientific thinking at our peril and must translate what we learn from science into urgent action.

---

Merylyn Hedger, Research Fellow Climate Change, Institute of Development Studies

Copenhagen has been described as a critical moment of history where the world declares its commitment as a single global society. What's needed is an innovative agree­ment to set the pathway that will mean global emissions of greenhouse gas emissions peak before 2020 and are cut by at least 50% by 2050. This is the minimum that is needed if we are to be in time to keep the global average temperature rise far below the danger threshold of 2°C. At the G8 and Major Economies Forum (MEF) meetings (in July at L'Aquila), some agreement was reached but there are still significant disagreements within and between the groups.

There is as yet no clear indication that the industrialised countries are prepared to change course themselves and commit sufficient finance and tech­nology for those developing countries with rapidly growing emissions to pursue low carbon development path­ways. At first it seemed the financial crisis could provide the trigger to a major shift but opportunities during the global recession for investment in a low carbon economy are being taken very tentatively. The poorest countries that have done least to contribute to the problem are likely to be hit by more droughts and floods, and experience greater hunger and disease. They need substantial sums, in addition to development aid, to enable them to adapt. Consequently, developing count­ries have made it clear that no global deal will be reached without a signif­icant funding deal. The Climate Convention (UNFCCC) Secretariat has suggested that annual needs for developing countries by 2030 could be an additional $84bn and for adaptation $100bn – seemingly large figures, until they are compared to funds spent in bailing out banks, global GDP each year, or the costs of catastrophic climate change.

As the largest provider of Official Development Assistance (ODA), the EU has taken a lead role in inter­national development efforts. Collect­ively, member states are also the largest donor to the several funding mechanisms within the UNFCCC. Whilst Europe has been seen as a driver at a political level for a negotiated agreement, its internal coherence on the critical finance issues is lacking. The UK's own manifesto launched in June points the way forward but is not yet agreed even across Europe. Can this be done in time?

It is well known that the Kyoto Protocol was a very small first step but it's not often pointed out that it took eight years to become operational after it was agreed. Vague outlines will not be enough in Copenhagen. A detailed system is needed for 2012. Time is running out.

---

Dr Vicky Pope, Head of Climate Change Advice, Met Office

Our climate is changing faster than it has for hundreds of thousands of years, driven by greenhouse gases from human activities. Some changes are happening now and, because of greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere, there will be further changes. This will have significant effects worldwide and we must understand as much as possible so we can adapt.

A key part of that understanding is to address uncertainties inherent in any scientific projections. To deal with this, the Met Office Hadley Centre has produced the most comprehensive analysis of regional climate change in the UK.

Published in June 2009 the projec­tions, part of a government-funded project called UKCP09, represent a major step forward. The projections provide probabilistic information on how the UK's climate will change in the 21st Century based on results from world-leading climate models, obser­vations, statistical analysis and expert interpretation.

UKCP09 tackles uncertainties in climate prediction by using a range of projections, generated by running the Met Office climate model hundreds of times using different values for key parameters. Therefore, many nuances in the understanding of atmospheric science are taken into account. To consider an even wider spread of possibilities, 12 other leading models have been used to create projections.

This approach has produced wide-ranging projections using our climate science, observations and expert judgement to determine confidence in each projection. The level of probability reflects how much each outcome is supported by evidence. The projections indicate the strength of evidence for the UK climate changing in particular ways, but the same approach can be taken for anywhere in the world. There are obvious benefits of improving understanding of climate change in areas of the world likely to be severely affected.

Probabilities reflect how confident we are that a change will happen, rather than the 'percentage chance' of it occurring. Therefore, a projection at the 90% level for temperature rise means we are 90% confident that temperatures will remain below this level, not that there is a 90% chance of it being this level.

Some change is inevitable over the next 30 years. However, the projections highlight how things may change depending on future emissions. The move to a low carbon economy and the reduction of greenhouse gases is vital, but we must also adapt to a changing climate in the UK to cope with more extreme weather including heatwaves, droughts and floods. Developing science to improve projections, particularly predicting natural variability, is vital for shorter-term projections of the next 30 years.

---

Dr Robert J Nicholls, Professor of Coastal Engineering, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton

Looking at the world's coasts and climate change, we face important challenges over the coming decades and centuries. Sea levels are slowly rising and this will accelerate: a metre rise or more is not implausible in the 21st Century. Other climate factors are important, with more intense storms being of particular concern, although we are much less confident about this than sea level.

Dealing with these issues is under­pinned by science and technology.

Our understanding of these possible changes emerges from sophisticated numerical models of ocean-atmosphere systems, and further developments of these is important, especially in terms of understanding how the 'sleeping giants' of sea level, Greenland and Antarctica, will respond to rising temperature. Our understanding of potential impacts again depends on models of variable complexity, and it is also fundamental that these continue to be improved.

Having recognised that sea level has a huge inertia and we are committed to some rise for centuries to come, it has become apparent that the best response to these challenges is a combination of reducing emissions (as will be discussed at Copenhagen) and adaptation to the impacts. Reducing emissions will keep sea level rise to a manageable rate, and adaptation will deal with the residual rise. Our adaptation technologies are broadening and it is now recognised that we might protect areas, abandon areas in a planned manner (termed 'retreat'), or the intermediate response of changing how we use the land (termed 'accommodation'). For instance, we might raise individual buildings above flood levels. Most protection approaches are well known, such as dikes and beach nourishment, although it is important to continue to innovate with this approach. Beach dewatering is one innovative and new strategy that may enhance protection, and help to widen beaches for tourists. Retreat and accommodation strategies require a good understanding of future changes as they allow change to occur. So their application reinforces the need to understand impacts outlined above. Adaptation also depends on knowing when extreme events will occur, and the storm warning systems that have developed since the 1953 East Coast storm have revolutionised our ability to predict such events.

Science and technology need signif­icant development to continue to deal with these issues over the 21st Century. This needs to happen in many ways, but a dominant theme above is the benefits of models and information technology. These have great capacity to develop further in the coming decades.

---

Connie Hedegaard, Danish Minister for Climate and Energy

The world needs ambitious clim­ate agreement in Copenhagen. In December, when all the countries of the world meet at COP15 to negotiate the frame­work of a global climate agreement, the main aim will be to safeguard the society we live in today. However, another objective will be to fashion a sustainable society, which will serve as the foundation for the green economic growth of the future.

At this time, 192 countries will be represented in Copenhagen. Denmark's goal is clear and unambiguous: we insist on an ambitious, global agree­ment that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Time is of the essence because all evidence suggests that we need to develop a more sustainable way of living. And here, the corporate world plays a central role in terms of finding concrete solutions.

It will not only be the climate that will benefit from this. The Nordic countries can no longer sustain themselves by relying on the pollution-producing industries of the past. There is a readiness in many other parts of the world to produce clothes, for example, under both human and environmental conditions we would never permit. This is why we need to develop new green products and production forms if we wish to continue to be at the forefront of international business. We should be making our money on smart solutions and good ideas.

The Nordic countries have always been good at developing innovative products and coming up with tech­nological solutions. It therefore seems natural that we should capitalise on the demand for solutions to the climate issue. We can do this by continuing our development process, which will ensure that Scandinavian products are a part of the cure against our dependence on fossil fuels.

In these times of financial crisis, Denmark's green corporate world sets a good example. The latest figures from 2008 show that Danish export of energy technology rose by 19%. This is approximately four times the corres­ponding number for ordinary export. This shows that it pays for the corporate world to go green – both now and in the future.

In 2050, our planet will be inhabited by nine billion people. And of those, eight billion will be living in what we now call developing countries. If they are all to have access to the same resources and economic growth, we are forced to find a better way to make use of our resources. We cannot continue polluting our planet and overusing fossil fuels the way we do today. That is simply not viable, scientists tell us. And in the same breath, they tell us that now is the time to act because if we don't do something today, it will become increasingly expensive to carry out the necessary measures in the future. In short: the cost of delaying action against climate change will only keep rising the longer we wait.

An international climate agreement in Copenhagen will ensure that the temperature on our planet does not reach dangerous levels, which would result in catastrophic climate change. And concurrently, we are in a position to develop the products necessary to solve the crisis, and thereby generate healthy economic growth in a manner that is sustainable and beneficial to our corporate world. What we, in effect, have is a golden, green oppor­tunity, which we shouldn't allow to turn to dust.