Latest news with #IPCC
Sinar Daily
a day ago
- Science
- Sinar Daily
Warning signs on climate flashing bright red
PARIS - From carbon pollution to sea-level rise to global heating, the pace and level of key climate change indicators are all in unchartered territory, more than 60 top scientists warned recently. Greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels and deforestation hit a new high in 2024 and averaged, over the last decade, a record 53.6 billion tonnes per year -- that's 100,000 tonnes per minute -- of CO2 or its equivalent in other gases, they reported in a peer-reviewed update. A man fills bottles with water in New York City on June 24, 2025. A potentially life-threatening heat wave enveloped the eastern third of the United States on June 23 impacting nearly 160 million people, with temperatures this week expected to reach 102 degrees Fahrenheit (39 degrees Celsius) in the New York metropolitan area. Dangerously high temperatures are forecast through midweek in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City and Boston. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz / AFP) Earth's surface temperature last year breached 1.5 degrees Celsius for the first time, and the additional CO2 humanity can emit with a two-thirds chance of staying under that threshold long-term -- our 1.5C "carbon budget" -- will be exhausted in a couple of years, they calculated. Investment in clean energy outpaced investment in oil, gas and coal last year two-to-one, but fossil fuels account for more than 80 percent of global energy consumption, and growth in renewables still lags behind new demand. Included in the 2015 Paris climate treaty as an aspirational goal, the 1.5C limit has since been validated by science as necessary for avoiding a catastrophically climate-addled world. The hard cap on warming to which nearly 200 nations agreed was "well below" two degrees, commonly interpreted to mean 1.7C to 1.8C. "We are already in crunch time for these higher levels of warming," co-author Joeri Rogelj, a professor of climate science and policy at Imperial College London, told journalists in a briefing. "The next three or four decades is pretty much the timeline over which we expect a peak in warming to happen." 'The wrong direction' No less alarming than record heat and carbon emissions is the gathering pace at which these and other climate indicators are shifting, according to the study, published in Earth System Science Data. Human-induced warming increased over the last decade at a rate "unprecedented in the instrumental record", and well above the 2010-2019 average registered in the UN's most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, in 2021. The new findings -- led by the same scientists using essentially the same methods -- are intended as an authoritative albeit unofficial update of the benchmark IPCC reports underpinning global climate diplomacy. They should be taken as a reality check by policymakers, the authors suggested. "I tend to be an optimistic person," said lead author Piers Forster, head of the University of Leed's Priestley Centre for Climate Futures. "But if you look at this year's update, things are all moving in the wrong direction." The rate at which sea levels have shot up in recent years is also alarming, the scientists said. After creeping up, on average, well under two millimetres per year from 1901 to 2018, global oceans have risen 4.3 mm annually since 2019. What happens next? An increase in the ocean watermark of 23 centimetres -- the width of a letter-sized sheet of paper -- over the last 125 years has been enough to imperil many small island states and hugely amplify the destructive power of storm surges worldwide. An additional 20 centimetres of sea level rise by 2050 would cause one trillion dollars in flood damage annually in the world's 136 largest coastal cities, earlier research has shown. Another indicator underlying all the changes in the climate system is Earth's so-called energy imbalance, the difference between the amount of solar energy entering the atmosphere and the smaller amount leaving it. So far, 91 percent of human-caused warming has been absorbed by oceans, sparing life on land an unlivable hell-scape. But the planet's energy imbalance has nearly doubled in the last 20 years, and scientists do not know how long oceans will continue to massively soak up this excess heat. Dire future climate impacts worse than what the world has already experienced are already baked in over the next decade or two. But beyond that, the future is in our hands, the scientists made clear. "We will rapidly reach a level of global warming of 1.5C, but what happens next depends on the choices which will be made," said co-author and former IPCC co-chair Valerie Masson-Delmotte. The Paris Agreement's 1.5C target allows for the possibility of ratcheting down global temperatures below that threshold before century's end. Ahead of a critical year-end climate summit in Brazil, international cooperation has been weakened by the US withdrawal the Paris Agreement. President Donald Trump's dismantling of domestic climate policies means the US is likely to fall short on its emissions reduction targets, and could sap the resolve of other countries to deepen their own pledges, experts say. - AFP
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Climate
- Indian Express
Express View: Asia on the boil
It's now well known that though climate change affects all parts of the world, some regions are more vulnerable than others. Asia, for example, is prone to almost all the consequences of global warming — heat waves, floods, erratic monsoons, melting glaciers and sea-level rises. A new report by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) released this week has found that the continent is warming twice as fast as the global average. Asia's vulnerability is exacerbated by its geology. The continent has the largest landmass — 44.58 million square kilometres. Temperature increases over land are greater than those over the oceans. The exceptionally high temperatures then cause oceans to warm up. That's why the continent experienced marine heat waves last year, the WMO report points out. The surface temperatures of the Indian and Pacific Oceans touched a record high last year. Ocean temperatures around Asia have risen at 0.24 degrees Celsius per decade over the past 10 years — nearly double the global average of 0.13 degrees. As natural disasters over the past 10 years have underlined, communities in South and Southeast Asia are particularly vulnerable to sea-level rises. The WMO report also draws attention to floods in Pakistan and Kazakhstan, heatwaves in China and Central Asian countries, typhoons in Southeast Asia and the landslide that struck Wayanad in Kerala last year. Outdoor work is important to the labour-intensive economies of most countries in the region, making people vulnerable to heat, rain and cold. Studies have also shown that though overall agricultural productivity has increased in Asia, climate change has slowed down progress. Research now indicates threats to food and water security in the world's most populous continent. For instance, the vulnerability of rice — a key staple in the region — to droughts, increasing salinity and soil damage has been underscored by several studies, including those by the IPCC. Almost every Asian country has a global warming mitigation plan. Increasingly, however, it's becoming clear that people will need to adapt to erratic weather. The WMO report underlines the need to put in place early warning systems. Such systems should help people deal with multiple hazards. For instance, intense spells of rain can trigger floods and landslides while high temperatures can spark wildfires or make them more severe. If there's one message in the WMO report, it's this — policymakers in Asia will need to invest in increasing people's resilience and weatherproofing economies.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Inconvenient truths to impactful policies
The impacts of anthropogenic climate change are being felt all over the globe. The sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has categorically stated that the earth's temperature in the decade 2011-20 has risen by 1.1 degrees Celsius compared to the pre-industrial (1850-1900) levels. At the same time, developed countries continue to occupy a disproportionate share of the global carbon budget and remain unwilling to provide the means of implementation to spur climate action. PREMIUM India's international climate initiatives embody the principle of vasudhaiva kutumbakam. (Getty Images) The ancient Vedic principle of sarve bhavantu sukhinah (may all beings be happy) has guided human civilisation for millennia. As the world grapples with the climate crisis, this timeless wisdom has found resonance in India's approach to climate stewardship. On the one hand, the global community often focuses on the inconvenient truths of the climate crisis — rising temperatures, erratic weather patterns, and increasing disasters. India, on the other hand, has championed a philosophy of convenient action. This approach, rooted in our civilisational ethos, has transformed India into a conscientious global climate citizen over the past 11 years. A verse from the Atharva Veda — 'What of Earth we dig out, let that quickly grow over, let us not hit thy vitals or pierce thy heart' — reflects principles of regenerative natural resource management predating modern climate science by thousands of years. Our approach to climate action has woven this ancient understanding into contemporary policy frameworks, forging a unique synthesis of traditional wisdom and modern action. In keeping with this approach, within weeks of assuming office in 2014, Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi demonstrated his climate commitment and far-sightedness by adding 'climate change' to the ministry of environment and forests. The National Adaptation Fund for Climate Change provided states with dedicated resources for climate resilience. Multiple state governments responded by establishing their own climate change departments, creating a federal cascade of climate action. In 2015, India took a leading role in global climate negotiations. PM Modi played a pivotal role in forging the Paris Agreement. Unlike nations that viewed climate commitments as burdens, India preferred to demonstrate concrete action by framing its first Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) at COP21 in Paris in the same year as an expression of our responsibility to the global community. The 2015 International Solar Alliance (ISA), with over 120 members, has created a platform for solar-rich countries to collaborate on clean energy. The installed capacity in renewable energy (RE) has risen from 76 GW in 2014 to 220 GW in March 2025 and is likely to reach 500 GW by 2030. In terms of installed capacity, India is fourth in the world in RE, fourth in wind energy and third in solar energy. Many of India's flagship schemes underline commitment to transformative climate action. The Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (2016) brought clean cooking fuel to millions of women. The PM-KUSUM scheme (2019) empowered farmers with solar energy solutions, while the rooftop solar programme accelerated renewable energy adoption across the country. In 2019, PM Modi announced the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI) at the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York City, creating a global partnership to promote disaster-resilient infrastructure development. LeadIT (Leadership Group for Industry Transition) was created in partnership with Sweden. The production-linked incentive (PLI) scheme for solar manufacturing (2020) strengthened domestic solar manufacturing capabilities, reducing import dependence and creating a robust indigenous solar ecosystem. At COP26 in Glasgow (2021), India made historic announcements further consolidating its climate trajectory. While delivering the national statement, PM Modi announced India's ambitious panchamrit — five nectar elements comprising enhanced climate commitment and achieving net-zero emissions by 2070. During the same address, he introduced Mission LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment), thereby involving citizens globally in the collective fight against the climate crisis. This historic commitment positioned India as a climate leader among developing nations. On November 2, 2021, at Glasgow during COP26, the PM launched IRIS (Infrastructure for Resilient Island States), joined by the PMs of Australia, Fiji, Jamaica, Mauritius, and the UK. Viksit Bharat 2047, announced in 2023, outlined the vision for becoming a developed nation by 2047 by maintaining a delicate balance between ecology and economy and prakriti (nature) and pragati (progress). Two transformative citizen-focused initiatives were launched in 2024. The PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana democratised solar energy access, while the launch of Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam (One tree in mother's name) created a mass movement for afforestation. Recognising nuclear power as a critical component for achieving energy security, the National Energy Mission for Viksit Bharat and the National Manufacturing Mission were launched in 2025. The Nuclear Energy Mission, with an allocation of ₹ 20,000 crore, focuses on research and development of small modular reactors. India's international climate initiatives embody the principle of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the world is one family). During India's G20 presidency, climate considerations were mainstreamed across several working groups beyond the environment and climate working group. India also launched the Global Biofuel Alliance, creating a platform for cooperation on sustainable biofuels. In transforming inconvenient truths into convenient action, the PM has shown that climate leadership requires not just scientific understanding, but the wisdom to align human action with natural harmony. Bhupender Yadav is Union minister for environment, forest and climate change. The views expressed are personal.
Indian Express
5 days ago
- Science
- Indian Express
The dangers of what we don't know: China's dam project and its effect on Brahmaputra needs more attention
Written by Anamika Barua, Sumit Vij and Ashim Sattar On December 25, 2024, China approved the construction of the Medog Dam, set to be the world's largest, on the Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra in India). This decision has ignited widespread concern, particularly regarding its ecological and downstream impacts on India and Bangladesh. While some experts contend that the Brahmaputra's perennial flow and abundant water supply mean the dam will not significantly alter its course, others suggest it could even help regulate floods. However, these arguments coexist with an acknowledgement: The Brahmaputra River Basin remains one of the most under-researched river systems in the world. This supports the uncomfortable truth that the scientific understanding of the basin remains woefully inadequate. In the face of such uncertainties, is it reasonable to assert that the dam will have 'no impact' or dismiss biophysical and human concerns as media sensationalism? Despite its robust models and extensive research, even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) avoids making absolute claims. Science thrives on probabilistic reasoning, preparing policymakers for various possible outcomes. Shouldn't we, as scientists, exercise similar caution and rigour before drawing definitive conclusions such as 'no impacts'? The challenges of climate variability The lack of scientific understanding of the Brahmaputra raises a pressing question: If there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that upstream dams will cause the river to dry up, is there sufficient data to claim it will remain unaffected? This uncertainty is particularly critical given the erratic impacts of climate change. Although the Brahmaputra benefits from abundant annual precipitation, shifting precipitation patterns introduce complexities that require deeper research. A recent study published in Water Conservation Science and Engineering (2024), which examined precipitation extremes in the Brahmaputra River Basin using NEX-GDDP datasets, reveals notable shifts in precipitation patterns across the region. In the upper Brahmaputra region (Tibet), consecutive wet days are projected to increase, leading to intense rainfall and heightened flood risks. Conversely, the lower basin (Assam) is likely to face more consecutive dry days, resulting in prolonged dry spells. These projections challenge the assumption that precipitation patterns will remain stable. In this context, India's dependence on upstream China is set to grow. During the wet season, uncoordinated water releases from Chinese dams could exacerbate flooding in downstream regions like Assam and Bangladesh, particularly during the monsoon. For China, such releases would enhance power generation, but for downstream communities, they would mean heightened flood risks. During the dry season, extended dry spells downstream would increase reliance on upstream water releases, complicating water management efforts. Research conducted under RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 climate scenarios underscores these challenges and highlights the urgent need for collaborative water governance and robust scientific investigation. Geopolitical and ecological implications The Medog Dam is touted as a run-of-the-river project with minimal downstream impact. Yet, China's lack of transparency and halted data sharing prevent India and Bangladesh from verifying these claims. The 2023 expiry of the India-China hydrological data-sharing agreement — crucial for flood preparedness in downstream states like Assam — adds to the uncertainty, with little public discussion on its renewal or improvement. Assam, already hit by pre-monsoon floods affecting nearly 7 lakh people, faces heightened vulnerability without timely data. The 2017 Doklam crisis showed the consequences of China's discontinuation of sharing hydrological information, coinciding with severe Assam floods. Without reliable data, flood forecasting and preparedness is difficult, leaving millions exposed. Robust data-sharing and transparency are essential for managing this fragile river system. Beyond flow concerns, the dam's location in Medog County — a seismically active zone and epicentre of the 1950 Assam-Tibet earthquake that altered the Brahmaputra's course — raises serious safety questions. Situated on a major tectonic fault, the dam faces high structural risks. Building without thorough geomorphological, seismic, and hydrological studies would be reckless, threatening not only the dam but also millions downstream. China must be held accountable to ensure that downstream nations know how dam safety will be guaranteed through joint research for the entire basin. International cooperation and transparency are critical to prevent potentially catastrophic impacts on this vital and vulnerable region. The overlooked role of glaciers Another critical yet under-discussed aspect is the role of glacier meltwater in sustaining the Brahmaputra's flows, especially during the dry seasons. Originating from glaciers in the Tibetan Plateau, these glaciers act as natural reservoirs, supporting irrigation, hydropower, and ecosystems. However, the contribution of glacier meltwater to the river system remains poorly quantified. Without precise data on the volume of water stored in these glaciers and their seasonal melt contributions, it is challenging to plan effectively for future water availability. Further, the long-term impacts of climate change on these glaciers will not remain static, further complicating the dynamics of glacier melt runoff to the Brahmaputra River. The health of these glaciers depends largely on their mass balance, which is influenced by precipitation in the form of snowfall at high altitudes. Understanding the variability of future solid precipitation in the basin requires robust scientific expertise to assess the glaciers' health and their evolving role in sustaining the river's flow. Addressing these knowledge gaps is vital to developing adaptive water management strategies for the Brahmaputra basin in the face of a changing climate. Current debates often emphasise monsoon-fed systems, overlooking the critical role of dry-season flows sustained by glacier melt. This omission leaves significant gaps in understanding the river's year-round dynamics. To claim that the Tibetan glaciers have no role whatsoever in sustaining the Brahmaputra's flows is, at best, an understatement, given the limited knowledge and data available on this aspect. The way forward The Medog Dam underscores the urgent need for transparency, cooperation, and comprehensive research. Downstream nations must push for multilateral negotiations on data-sharing and joint research to explain the basin-wide impacts of water infrastructure. Instead of dismissing concerns about China's dam projects, India and Bangladesh should seek alliances to advocate for collaborative management of the Brahmaputra River Basin. The stakes are too high to ignore. Without robust science and cooperative frameworks, the Medog Dam may become not just a marvel of engineering but a flashpoint for environmental, geopolitical, and social disasters. The scientific community needs to refrain from creating lop-sided narratives of 'no impact' as this could undermine India's negotiating position with China. Instead, we must promote an evidence-based narrative that water infrastructure on the Brahmaputra will be the point of conflict in the near future. We must accept the future challenges and start working towards science to develop a negotiated solution portfolio for the next generation of South Asia. Anamika Barua is Professor, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati; Sumit Vij is Assistant Professor, Wageningen University, the Netherlands; Ashim Sattar, Assistant Professor, Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneshwar
The Advertiser
6 days ago
- Climate
- The Advertiser
How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine
How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb.
