Schlagwort: climate change

Report: Reducing the Risks of Climate Change

by Climate Overshoot Commission, 14 September 2023

The risk of climate overshoot – that is, of exceeding the Paris Agreement goal of limiting average global warming to 1.5°C – is high and rising, and with it the risk of worsening impacts on human health, food security, water availability, social stability, and ecosystems. People worldwide would welcome a safer, cleaner, more equitable world. All countries could, and should, act now to help bring about such a world. The CARE agenda offers an integrated set of recommendations for achieving this by

  • Cutting emissions of greenhouse gasses
  • Adapting to the unavoidable impacts of climate change
  • Removing carbon from the atmosphere
  • Exploring solar radiation modification


Analysis: How UK newspapers changed their minds about climate change

by Josh Gabbatiss, Sylvia Hayes, Joe Goodman, Tom Prater on Carbon Brief

The past decade has seen a significant shift in the attitudes of UK newspapers towards climate change, according to new analysis undertaken by Carbon Brief. Drawing from a database of more than 1,300 editorials, which are the formal “voice” of a newspaper, this work examines how the language used to describe human-caused climate change, as well as renewables, fracking and nuclear power, has shifted since 2011.


Call for Session and Workshop proposals submission for the 5th symposium on Climate Change Effects on the World’s Ocean

Deadline: January 31, 2022

ECCWO5 will host events on a diverse and exciting range of topics and disciplines within and across the natural and social sciences that can potentially contribute to the Seventh Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (AR7), the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, implementation of actions identified in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and the goals and climate negotiations in COP27. Join them in Bergen, Norway, in 17-21 April 2023.


The conversation: Scientists call for a moratorium on climate change research until governments take real action

The authors argue that the time has come for scientists to agree to a moratorium on climate change research as a means to first expose, then renegotiate, the broken science-society contract. The related publication is written by Bruce C. Glavovic, Timothy F. Smith & Iain White (2021): The tragedy of climate change science, Climate and Development, DOI: 10.1080/17565529.2021.2008855.


Pereira et al. (2021): From fAIrplay to climate wars: making climate change scenarios more dynamic, creative, and integrative

Laura M. Pereira, David R. Morrow, Valentina Aquila, Brian Beckage, Sam Beckbesinger, Lauren Beukes, Holly J. Buck, Colin J. Carlson , Oliver Geden, Andrew P. Jones, David P. Keller, Katharine J. Mach, Mohale Mashigo, Juan B. Moreno-Cruz, Daniele Visioni, Simon Nicholson, Christopher H. Trisos IN: Ecology and Society 26(4):30;

„We offer a step-by-step guide to the modified Manoa Mash-up method to generate more integrative, creative, and dynamic scenarios; reflect on broader implications of using this method for generating more dynamic scenarios for climate change research and policy; and provide examples of using the scenarios in climate policy communication, including a choose-your-own adventure game called Survive the Century (, which was played by over 15,000 people in the first 2 weeks of launching.“


Stoddard, Isak et al. (2021): Three decades of climate mitigation: Why haven’t we bent the global emissions curve?

Isak Stoddard, Kevin Anderson, Stuart Capstick, Wim Carton, Joanna Depledge, Keri Facer, Clair Gough, Frederic Hache, Claire Hoolohan, Martin Hultman, Niclas Hällström, Sivan Kartha, Sonja Klinsky, Magdalena Kuchler, Eva Lövbrand, Naghmeh Nasiritousi, Peter Newell, Glen P. Peters, Youba Sokona, Andy Stirling, Matthew Stilwell, Clive L. Spash, Mariama Williams IN: Annual Review of Environment and Resources Vol. 46: 653-689,

REVIEW: Despite three decades of political efforts and a wealth of research on the causes and catastrophic impacts of climate change, global carbon dioxide emissions have continued to rise and are 60% higher today than they were in 1990. Exploring this rise through nine thematic lenses—covering issues of climate governance, the fossil fuel industry, geopolitics, economics, mitigation modeling, energy systems, inequity, lifestyles, and social imaginaries—draws out multifaceted reasons for our collective failure to bend the global emissions curve.


The Herald: Iain Macwhirter: Reasons to be cheerful about COP26

„There has been a lot of negativity about the COP26 climate summit, which kicks off in Glasgow a week today. Hardly surprising, with China boycotting it, petro-states frantically lobbying to reduce targets and nonsense being talked here about heat pumps which just inflame voter cynicism. There will be a lot of corporate mischief on the sidelines, a lot of fudging and obfuscation and a vast expenditure of hot air. One of the biggest rows will not be about greenhouse gases at all, but the paucity of Covid vaccines for developing countries. […] But before we dissolve into negativity and reach for the bottle, it’s worth remembering that the last big climate summit, in Paris in 2015, also failed to deliver. It too was supposed to agree legally-binding emissions targets, but only agreed, after frantic late-night horse-trading, on a legal obligation to report on emissions targets. There was no actual requirement to meet them. Donald Trump’s departure from the Paris Treaty was thus ineffably stupid since it didn’t actually commit America to anything concrete. But most economists still regard Paris as a success, if only because it concentrated the minds of politicians and accelerated a shift from fossil fuels that was beginning to gain momentum in the 2010s. The International Energy Agency believes that the recent spectacular reductions in the wholesale cost of renewable energy, especially offshore wind and solar, are down to Paris and the signals it sent to investors.“


Morrow, David R.; Nicholson, Simon (2021): Sustainable Carbon Removal

Morrow, David R.; Nicholson, Simon (2021): Sustainable Carbon Removal. American University, School of International Service.

„Analyzing carbon removal at different levels can illuminate environmental, social, and economic risks and opportunities. Levels of analysis range from broad technological categories, like reforestation, to specific projects, like Climeworks’ Orca direct air capture project in Iceland. Most analyses have focused on broad technological categories, but more fine-grained analyses are crucial for delivering actionable advice. Finding metrics for environmental, social, and economic impacts is vital for quantifying positive and negative impacts and comparing approaches. One possibility is to use the indicators for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which are politically negotiated, internationally accepted metrics of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Determining which approaches are most sustainable requires balancing different positive and negative impacts that may not be easily comparable. There are several ways to do this, ranging from intuitive judgments to multicriteria decision analysis, although any decisions about which approaches are most sustainable are ultimately political decisions. In summary, to develop sustainable carbon removal, we need to identify sustainability metrics, such as the indicators behind the Sustainable Development Goals; apply those metrics at different levels of analysis; and develop strategies for determining which approaches strike the right balance between environmental, social, and economic goals.“