Beyond ‘dangerous’ climate change: emission scenarios for a new world

Abstract

The Copenhagen Accord reiterates the international community’s commitment to ‘hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius’. Yet its preferred focus on global emission peak dates and longer-term reduction targets, without recourse to cumulative emission budgets, belies seriously the scale and scope of mitigation necessary to meet such a commitment. Moreover, the pivotal importance of emissions from non-Annex 1 nations in shaping available space for Annex 1 emission pathways received, and continues to receive, little attention. Building on previous studies, this paper uses a cumulative emissions framing, broken down to Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 nations, to understand the implications of rapid emission growth in nations such as China and India, for mitigation rates elsewhere. The analysis suggests that despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is now little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature at or below 2 ° C. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2 ° C have been revised upwards, sufficiently so that 2 ° C now more appropriately represents the threshold between ‘dangerous’ and ‘extremely dangerous’ climate change. Ultimately, the science of climate change allied with the emission scenarios for Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 nations suggests a radically different framing of the mitigation and adaptation challenge from that accompanying many other analyses, particularly those directly informing policy.

Rethinking adaptation for a 4 ° C world

“…The 15th Conference of the Parties meeting in Copenhagen that occurred shortly afterwards provided little encouragement that these large changes can be prevented through politically negotiated emissions reductions [2]. Potential impacts associated with an increase of more than 4 • C in global average temperatures are severe, particularly as even higher levels of change may be experienced locally (e.g.…”

What Moral Distress in Nursing History Could Suggest about the Future of Health Care

“…Levels of consumption in developed nations are decreasingly sustainable on a limited earth [65][66][67][68]. In the next decades, US per capita material and energy consumption needs to be scaled down to a terrestrial scale [66,68,[69][70][71]. Since US health care already comprises a significant proportion of GDP, if the economy is to be scaled down, so must health care [72,73].…”

The Systemic and Global Dimension of Business Resilience in a Socio-Technical Perspective

“…Life, at any standard of quality, requires energy and most of energy we need [37] comes from combustibles. This sources carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that is not sunk and global warming ensues with high probability of very dangerous effects [38]. The effects of global warming include a reduction of livable territories areas [39] with mass migrations upsetting the equilibrium obtained among nations in what respects occupied territory.…”