Editorial:
Global warming - now for the hard part
09
May 2007
It
may have passed you by but the world's politicians took a step last week that
will dominate national and international priorities for decades to come. More
than 100 nations, including the US and China, agreed the third report this year
from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which lays out
timetables for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and the ways to achieve
the necessary cuts. The consequences of inaction are so dire that, barring utter
cynicism on the part of governments, we can expect to be heading for a
low-carbon future.
The
report, like its two predecessors, has a clear, authoritative message. If we
choose to, it says, we can stabilise global temperature at about 2.8 °C above
pre-industrial levels. To achieve this we must cut carbon dioxide emissions by
up to 60 per cent relative to levels in 2000 - and do so before 2050. There is
no room for delay. To hit this target means that CO2
levels will have to have peaked by 2020 at the latest, which gives us just 13
years to reverse the present growth in emissions.
The
good news is that to achieve such a change would slow annual growth of GDP by
something like 0.12 percentage points, a cost that many economists consider
trivial (see "Price of action"). The bad news is that even a 2.8 °C
rise could condemn hundreds of millions of people to water shortages, leave
millions vulnerable to coastal flooding and put about 30 per cent of species at
risk of extinction. If we choose to defer action, the toll of death and
destruction will only rise.
Achieving
the cuts requires a sweeping switch to low-carbon technologies and practices. In
transport we need hybrid vehicles, biofuels and a concerted effort to move
traffic from road to rail. Equally radical changes are needed in the
construction, agriculture and forestry sectors. Much of the technology already
exists and the practices are known. but they are not yet used. The onus is on
governments to come up with incentives to change that.
"Much
of the technology exists and the practices are known. Now governments have to
ensure they are used"
Key
to the success of all these measures is putting a price on carbon, particularly
when it comes to electricity generation. Today, wind power, solar and other
renewable sources generate about 18 per cent of global electricity. The authors
calculate that by 2030, if each tonne of CO2
emitted incurs a cost of $50, renewables could increase that share to 30 to 35
per cent. Nuclear power could only marginally increase its share to 18 per cent
of total electricity, from 16 per cent at present, because of fears over safety,
weapons proliferation and waste disposal. Again, governments must create the
conditions to let low-carbon technologies thrive.
One
big surprise in the report is that despite the blatant need for alternatives to
fossil fuels over the past 30 years, governments have not increased their
spending on energy research and development. In real terms, investment today is
about half what it was in 1980. This needs immediate attention, especially if
carbon is going to be sequestered from power stations, and renewables such as
wave and tidal power are to be brought on line. The research gap also raises the
question of whether it is time for more international cooperation in this area,
rather than the largely piecemeal fashion in which research is now conducted
around the world.
The
thought of cooperation may not go down well with nations that see themselves as
competitors in a fierce global market, but mitigating global warming is going to
stand much political thinking on its head because one country's failure spells
failure for all. Wealthy developed countries have no option but to help poorer
countries acquire low-carbon technologies. The alternatives - to let them burn
fossil fuels or prevent them from developing - are unacceptable. The short-term
thinking characteristic of modern democracies will also be seriously tested as
politicians shape up to the task of convincing voters to change their behaviour
not for their own benefit, but for their children's.
Never
before have scientists presented governments with such a challenge. The pressure
is now on the politicians. Their responses domestically and internationally - at
the G8 summit and negotiations to create a successor to the Kyoto protocol -
will be crucial. We are about to find out how creative our political leaders
really are.
From
issue 2603 of New Scientist magazine, 09 May 2007, page 3
For what's in New Scientist magazine this week see contents