File:Climate diplomacy is failing - June 2020.jpg: Difference between revisions
Siterunner (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Siterunner (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
''Alex Steffen / University of Manchester Report'' | |||
<big>''Even ‘climate progressive’ nations fall far short of Paris Agreement targets''</big> | |||
''New research focusing on the UK and Sweden, demonstrates just how far even ‘climate progressive’ nations are from meeting our international commitments to avoid dangerous climate change.'' | |||
The | ''The researchers concluded that despite the UK and Sweden claiming to have world leading climate legislation, their planned reductions in emissions will still lead to total emissions two to three times greater than is their fair share of a Paris-compliant global carbon budget.'' | ||
''The annual rate that emissions are expected to be cut is less than half of that required, with the scientists suggesting a minimum for the UK of 10% each year, starting in 2020. Similarly, the date of achieving a fully zero-carbon energy system should be around 2035, rather than the UK’s current ‘net-zero’ by 2050 legislation.'' | |||
"Academics have done an excellent job in understanding and communicating climate science, but the same cannot be said in relation to reducing emissions. Here we have collectively denied the necessary scale of mitigation, running scared of calling for fundamental changes to both our energy system and the lifestyles of high-energy users." | ''The study led by Professor Kevin Anderson from The University of Manchester, is published in the journal Climate Policy. The team of climate scientists asked how close these countries are to meeting the UN’s climate commitments if the ‘safe’ quantity of emissions, the global carbon budget, is shared fairly between ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries.'' | ||
''Professor Kevin Anderson, draws a damning conclusion from the research: '' | |||
''"Academics have done an excellent job in understanding and communicating climate science, but the same cannot be said in relation to reducing emissions. Here we have collectively denied the necessary scale of mitigation, running scared of calling for fundamental changes to both our energy system and the lifestyles of high-energy users."'' | |||
Line 25: | Line 28: | ||
[[Category:Anthropocene]] | [[Category:Anthropocene]] | ||
[[Category:Atmospheric Science]] | [[Category:Atmospheric Science]] | ||
[[Category:City Governments]] | [[Category:City Governments]] | ||
Line 38: | Line 34: | ||
[[Category:Climate Migration]] | [[Category:Climate Migration]] | ||
[[Category:Climate Policy]] | [[Category:Climate Policy]] | ||
[[Category:Desertification]] | [[Category:Desertification]] | ||
[[Category:Earth Imaging]] | [[Category:Earth Imaging]] | ||
[[Category:Earth Observations]] | [[Category:Earth Observations]] | ||
Line 59: | Line 53: | ||
[[Category:Externalities]] | [[Category:Externalities]] | ||
[[Category:Extinction]] | [[Category:Extinction]] | ||
[[Category:Forests]] | [[Category:Forests]] | ||
[[Category:Fossil Fuels]] | [[Category:Fossil Fuels]] | ||
[[Category:Global Security]] | [[Category:Global Security]] | ||
[[Category:Global Warming]] | [[Category:Global Warming]] | ||
Line 92: | Line 83: | ||
[[Category:Sea-level Rise]] | [[Category:Sea-level Rise]] | ||
[[Category:Sea-Level Rise & Mitigation]] | [[Category:Sea-Level Rise & Mitigation]] | ||
[[Category:Solar Energy]] | [[Category:Solar Energy]] | ||
[[Category:Strategic Demands]] | [[Category:Strategic Demands]] | ||
[[Category:Sustainability Policies]] | [[Category:Sustainability Policies]] | ||
[[Category:Sweden]] | |||
[[Category:Threat Multiplier]] | [[Category:Threat Multiplier]] | ||
[[Category:United Nations]] | [[Category:United Nations]] | ||
[[Category:UK]] | |||
[[Category:US]] | [[Category:US]] | ||
[[Category:US Environmental Protection Agency]] | [[Category:US Environmental Protection Agency]] |
Latest revision as of 17:01, 22 June 2020
Alex Steffen / University of Manchester Report
Even ‘climate progressive’ nations fall far short of Paris Agreement targets
New research focusing on the UK and Sweden, demonstrates just how far even ‘climate progressive’ nations are from meeting our international commitments to avoid dangerous climate change.
The researchers concluded that despite the UK and Sweden claiming to have world leading climate legislation, their planned reductions in emissions will still lead to total emissions two to three times greater than is their fair share of a Paris-compliant global carbon budget.
The annual rate that emissions are expected to be cut is less than half of that required, with the scientists suggesting a minimum for the UK of 10% each year, starting in 2020. Similarly, the date of achieving a fully zero-carbon energy system should be around 2035, rather than the UK’s current ‘net-zero’ by 2050 legislation.
The study led by Professor Kevin Anderson from The University of Manchester, is published in the journal Climate Policy. The team of climate scientists asked how close these countries are to meeting the UN’s climate commitments if the ‘safe’ quantity of emissions, the global carbon budget, is shared fairly between ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries.
Professor Kevin Anderson, draws a damning conclusion from the research:
"Academics have done an excellent job in understanding and communicating climate science, but the same cannot be said in relation to reducing emissions. Here we have collectively denied the necessary scale of mitigation, running scared of calling for fundamental changes to both our energy system and the lifestyles of high-energy users."
○
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 16:54, 22 June 2020 | 592 × 440 (71 KB) | Siterunner (talk | contribs) |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
The following page uses this file:
- Anthropocene
- Atmospheric Science
- City Governments
- Climate Change
- Climate Migration
- Climate Policy
- Desertification
- Earth Imaging
- Earth Observations
- Earth360
- Earth Science
- Earth Science from Space
- Earth System Science
- Ecology Studies
- Eco-nomics
- Education
- Energy
- Environmental Laws
- Environmental Protection
- Environmental Security
- Environmental Security, National Security
- ESA
- European Union
- Externalities
- Extinction
- Forests
- Fossil Fuels
- Global Security
- Global Warming
- Green Graphics
- Green Networking
- Green Best Practices
- Green Politics
- Health
- INDC
- Maps
- Money in Politics
- NASA
- NOAA
- Natural Resources
- Networking
- New Definitions of National Security
- New Economy
- New Space
- Oceans
- Ocean Science
- Online Education
- Planet Citizen
- Planet Citizens
- Planet Citizens, Planet Scientists
- Rainforest
- Renewable Energy
- Resilience
- Sea-level Rise
- Sea-Level Rise & Mitigation
- Solar Energy
- Strategic Demands
- Sustainability Policies
- Sweden
- Threat Multiplier
- United Nations
- UK
- US
- US Environmental Protection Agency
- Water Quality
- Whole Earth
- Wind Energy
- World Bank
- World Wide Web
- Youth