Climate Change Flashcards
Books of use
- Klein (2015) This Changes Everything
- Bonneuil and Fressoz (2017) Shock Anthropocene
- Klein (2007) The Shock Doctrine
- Wallace-Wells (2019) The Uninhabitable Earth
- Carson (1962) Silent Spring
- Wilkinson and Pickett (2010) Spirit Level
- Dorling (2017) Equality Effect
- Kolbert (2015) Field notes form a catastrophe
- Robinson (2018) Climate Justice
- Lovelock (1979) Gaia
- Extinction Rebellion (2019)
- Oreskes and Conway (2010) Merchants of Doubt
- Juniper (2013) What has nature ever done for us
Environmental History
[Timeline of Key events UNFCCC History - http://unfccc.int/timeline/]
- 1940s focus endangered species
- 50s/60s ecosystem preservation / national parks movement
- 60s/70s conservation and development
- 80s N/S, sustainable dev
- 80s emergence international agenda - 1988 US drought, Caribbean hurricanes, Hansen chief climate scientist at NASA statement to US senate, Toronto conference on the changing atmosphere, IPCC formed, Thatcher’s speech to Royal Society
- 90s climate change
- 1990 IPCC First Assessment Report - human emissions causing GHGs - leads to start UN General Assembly Negotiations on a Framework Convention
- 1992 154 countries sign UNFCCC - June Rio Earth Summit
- 1994 UNFCCC enters into force
- 1995 COP1 Berlin
- 1995 IPCC Second Assessment Report
- 1996 COP2 Geneva
- 1997 Kyoto Protocol (COP3) - first GHG emissions reduction treaty
- 2000 COP6 Hague collapse disagreements US/Europe use Kyoto mechanisms
- 2001 US withdraws Kyoto - COP7 sets stage Kyoto ratification - CDM, rules emissions trading
- 2004 COP10 Buenos Aires Programme of Work on Adaptation and Response Measures
- 2005 Kyoto becomes law after Russian ratification 55% - EU Emissions Trading Launches (EU ETS)
- 2006 COP12 Nairobi Work Programme on Adaptation + Nairobi Framework on Capacity-Building for the CDM - CDM opens
- 2007 IPCC 4th Assessment Report + COP13 Bali Action Plan - call for long-term goal for emissions reductions
- 2008 Joint Implementation Mechanism starts - countries earn emission reductions from promoting project elsewhere - COP14, Adaptation Fund
- COP15 2009 Copenhagen
- 2010 COP16 Cancun agreements - Green climate fund, technology mechanism, cancun adaptation framework (govs assist developing w CC)
- 2011 Durban COP17 adopt universal legal agreement on CC as soon as possible - agree new CC agreement by 2015, launch Momentum for Change
- 2012 COP18 Doha - launch second commitment period Kyoto
- 2013 IPCC 5th assessment report - COP 19 REDD
- 2014 UN secretary-general’s climate summit, 5th IPCC report - COP20 Lima
- 2015 COP21 Paris Agreement, SDGs
- 2017 One Planet Summit - low-carbon future
- 2018 IPCC 1.5 report, Katowice climate package
1988 Toronto Conference
- Reduce emissions to 1988 levels by 2000 and further reduction 20% from 1988 levels by 2005
- first international conference on CC, 46 countries, first emissions reductions targets
1997 Kyoto Protocol
- in Bulkeley and Newell (2015)
Over 150 countries sign Kyoto Protocol - 38 annex 1 industrialised countries reduce emissions 5.2% average below 1990 levels during 2008-2012
- USA reduce emissions 7%, Japan 6% and EU 8% - other industrialised countries small increases, others freeze emissions
- CDM and Joint Implementation
- first legally binding agreement
- US withdraw in 2001
2009 COP15 Copenhagen
- Copenhagen Accord agreed by small group countries - industrialised nations committed provide developing nations with US$30bn of new, additional fast-track funding 2010-12 _ US$100bn per year by 2020 through Green Climate Fund
Paris 2015
- Keep temps below 2 degrees, aim for 1.5
- limit GHG emissions to level can be managed in earth’s system
- scale up ambition targets/review every 5 years
- increased levels climate finance to developing countries
- 2016 US + China agreed ratify Paris Agreement - needs 55% global emissions before becomes globally binding
- signed by 195 countries
- Syria and Nicaragua only countries not to sign
- Ratified by 168 oct 2017
- NDCs or Nationally determined contributions are the heart of Paris Agreement – efforts by each country to reduce emissions and adapt to CC – each party or state has to prepare, communicate, maintain and update NDCs it intends to achieve.
- long term goal zero emissions
- ambitious - encouraged to do more, 5 year reviews
- more adaptation/mitigation international finance
- no agreement on loss and damage - regions experience loss/damage should reimbursed/assisted UNFCCC
- NAZCA - non-state actors sign - nearly 10,000 cities
Jordan et al. (2018) Policentricity CC governance
- UNFCCC criticised being to slow produce results - 30 years governance emissions not peaked, not track 2 degrees
- international regime not accomplish climate governance alone not new
- bottom-up governance happening - state and non state actors - Ostrom (2010) positive poly centric governance had emerged and would increase - need for polycentric system diff governance diff scales - as opposed monocentric system single power
- where Ostrom optimistic many early 2000s saw widening climate governance as fragmentation - distraction international efforts (biermann et al 2009) - or else saw it as alternative not complementary to international regime like Ostrom
- conventional climate governance starts international regime, works down/out - Keohane and Victor (2011) see move regime complex
- Paris see move from set state emissions targets to states setting own - states not waiting for international regime to act anymore - regional govs, private sector
- features of poly centric systems = local action (each actor own actions, work out where fit among others), mutual adjustment (units interact, adjust around each other), experimentation (with approaches/solutions - multiple can be tested same time), trust and overarching rules (to link local initiatives)
Bulkeley and Newell (2015) Intro/ History Governing CC
- growing scientific certainty, CC concern but slow international efforts
- orthodox approach = CC global problem so needs global solution - state cooperation to reduce emissions through international treaties
- other ways understand CC - global processes = diff geog responsibility on TNCs and rich consumers (Shell emits more than Saudi Arabia)
- CC framing global neglects other levels decision making
- issue focus on states in neoliberal, globalised world
- CC complex process, cuts through space and scale - need think beyond state
- US hegemon, WB, IMF- becomes more important than international institutions = uneven power system
- look at regimes through norms, values, knowledge shapes states/international institution - interests, IPCC - relationship science and climate policy complex and politicised
- Regime theory vs regime complex
- UNFCCC = secretariat, COP = meeting parties annually review progress commitments, decision making body climate negotiations, Subsidiary Bodies for Implementation, Scientific and Technological Advice and working groups specific issues, observer organisations
- COP blocks like OPEC, AOSIS (small island states) G77 (developing + China) - rise BRICs
- UNFCCC 1992 - then Kyoto, CDM, Joint Implementation, 2001 US left Kyoto over econ developing world not having reduce emissions
- 2007 Least Developed Countries Fund, Special Climate Change Fund, Adaptation Fund
- COP12 Nairobi focus SSA and CDM
- scientific knowledge greenhouse effect since 1800s but no attention politicians till 70s/80s
- N/S social justice/equity issues - common differentiated responsibility - uneven patterns responsibility and vulnerability
- markets and neoliberal governance - EU ETS
Christoff (2010) Copenhagen
- 2009 COP15 Copenhagen meant establish goals after 2012 end Kyoto first commitment period, but Accord non-binding, China and US domestic influenced, UNFCCC weakness highlighted
- marked slow progress, walk-outs and disagreement
- final draft issue emphasis industrialised countries emissions reductions- supported G77 not Annex 1
- Copenhagen Accord written Brazil, india, China, South Africa
- china stalling progress - sent low ranking officials, missed meetings
- US secret meetings, accord announced media before accepted - accord denounced and blocked
- accord no specific targets, not consistent 2 degrees, Green Climate Fund
- tackling CC needs collective action but states focus domestic situation
- Country blocs stalemate
- issue US/China = 40% global emissions
- china dev pressures, manufacturing hub, wants to be superpower, increasing inequality, pol instability, CCP threats, ageing population, very dependent global markets
- US under Obama hoped climate leadership but not case - not have large majority in senate, so could not get support climate deals unless china/India reduct as competitors economically
UNFCCC (1992)
Actual framework document
- focus on states/international bodies
- differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities - developed lead/fund
- present and future generations
- prevent ‘dangerous’ anthropogenic interference with the climate system
- parities to cooperate to promote a supportive, open international econ system = sustainable econ growth and dev in all parities, esp developing, so can address CC
- promote education and public awareness CC
- COP, body tech/scientific advice and financial mechanism established
Climate Action Tracker (2020)
http://www.climateactiontracker.org
- how well countries doing towards 1.5 degree goal
- Morocco compatible, india 2 degree compatible, EU insufficient, China highly insufficient, USA critically insufficient
Taylor and Watts (2019) 20 firms behind a third of all carbon emissions
- 20 fossil fuel companies = 35% energy-related CO2 and methane / 480bn tonnes CO2 since 1965
- Chevron, Exxon, BP and Shell = over 10%
- what matters is pol action and stamping down corporations - more impact than lifestyle change - fossil fuel companies aware env harm but funded campaigns spread doubt climate science - 1965 US President’s Science Advisory Committee warned fossil fuels were causing more CO2 = huge risks human-kind - same year head American petroleum institute wanted industry time running out deal with this. 1981 Exxon memo warned their CO2 emissions devastating impacts yet in 2000 exxon ad in NY Times play down connection them and CC. 2016 Exxon Chevron and BP donate over half a million dollars to Trump’s campaign.
- 12/20 companies state owned and 20% emissions - eg saudi Aramco (4.83%)
- failed pol system = population world suffer hands few people’s profits
- 90% emissions occurred at point of use - companies claim not responsible for consumers - many also claim part solution, renewables / low carbon alternatives - PetroChina claimed diff company from predecessor China National Petroleum so not responsible historic emissions
- CO2 + methane emissions from 90 biggest industrial carbon producers responsible almost half rise global temps and 1/3 sea level rise 1880-2010
- UN 2018 world has 12 years to avoid worst consequences and restrict to 1.5 degrees
Werndl (2016)
Definition of climate should have 5 characteristics
- possible estimate climate from empirical data (and use empirical climates to estimate future conditions)
- defined climate should correctly classify climates that are uncontroversially different
- the definition should be independent of our knowledge
- the definition should be applicable to past, present, and future conditions
- should be mathematically well-defined
- Climate def 1 = distribution over time for constant external conditions
- Climate def 2 = distribution over time when the external conditions vary as in reality
- climate def 3 = distribution over time for regimes of varying external conditions - means of external conditions should at least be approximately constant
Oreskes (2010)
- “If I have one message, that has been my message all along and it still is: this is not a scientific debate. It’s a political debate being made to look like a scientific debate. It is being camouflaged as science, being dressed up as a scientific debate.”
- Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the “body of fact” that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.
Memo from tobacco industry, 1969
FLICC Framework CC examples
- Fake experts and Magnified Minority e.g. Global Warming Petition Project – 31000 ‘scientists’ signing a petition but only need an undergrad science degree to sign and that 31000 is only 0.3% of all americans with science degrees in last 37 yrs and only 0.1% of these are climate scientists. Number used is deliberately large to try and emphasise magnified minority, and also Fake Experts (99.9% of the signatories are not experts in climate science).
- Logical Fallacies
Red Herring – e.g. CO2 is a colourless, invisible gas so how can it have an influence Misrepresentation – misquotes, partial quotes, misattribution (e.g. the ‘Coming Ice Age’ in 1975 was from a Newsweek article not from scientific papers)
Jumping to Conclusions – e.g. heat island effect (this has been looked at and the same temperature trend comes from rural and urban stations)
False dichotomy – presenting only two choices when other choices are available. E.g. ice core evidence of CO2 and temperature lag (presented as one must always follow other but in fact positive feedback can means it can happen either way)
Impossible expectations – demands unrealistic standards of proof before action (e.g. tobacco industry kept raising standard of proof of link between cancer. Eg. The fact that models don’t produce perfect predictions can be used to argue against any model predictions (even when all models, independently developed and in different ways might agree on broad patterns and trends)
Cherry picking e.g. some glaciers are receding, a few temperature stations are going down, cold winters in UK. Should always be wary of findings in a regional/local context, or from a subset of data that show different results from the full dataset
Conspiracy theories – e.g. It’s a conspiracy – scientists are colluding to get research funding, or to get personally wealthy
Real Example FLICC - Open Letter to the Geological Society (2018) - climate denial
- concerns: climate models fail model past climates accurately and overestimate future temp trends; current pause in warming; why 285ppm CO2 start industrial revolution is a desirable benchmark (coincides with victorian little lice age); co2 and temp higher than today during past 50mn years; natural warming 8 degrees and 100ppm co2 increase during holocene until 1800s
- “Such rational failures have to be of concern to the GSL [Geological Society of London] as they demonstrate that CO2 alone does not, nay cannot drive global warming, so how can it drive climate change? And if it does not, there is no reason for the uncritical acceptance of the UN/IPCC focus on penalising CO2 emissions?”
WMO 1979 cited in Patterson 1996 (World Meteorological Association)
“…we can say with some confidence that the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and changes of land use have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 15% during the last century and it is at present increasingly by about 0.4% per year. It is likely that an increase will continue in the future. Carbon Dioxide plays a fundamental role in determining the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere, and it appears plausible that an increased amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can contribute to a gradual warming of the lower atmosphere, especially at high latitudes. Patterns of change would be likely to affect the distribution of temperature, rainfall and other meteorological parameters, but the details of the changes are still poorly understood.”
Paterson (1996)
it was clearly not the case that an epistemic consensus neatly produced international co-operation on the climate issue. Instead, it produced resources for policymakers from different countries … to advance the positions they preferred – it became another strategic argument at their disposal. Thus, oil producing countries were able to emphasise the uncertainties (even those within the limits of the scientific consensus).
Macnaghten and Urry (1998)
“there is no singular nature as such, only natures. And such natures are historically, geographically and socially constituted. … once we acknowledge that ideas of nature both have been, and currently are, fundamentally intertwined with dominant ideas of society, we need to address what ideas of society and of its ordering become reproduced, legitimated, excluded, validated and so on, through appeals to nature or the natural.”
Parker (2018) Climate Science
- investigates earth’s climate system - global, regional, local climates maintain/change - explain/predict workings climate system - modelling
- earth’s climate system complex - atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, biosphere - human activities part system, but often as external influences
- climate = average weather 30 years
- main issue external factors impacting internal regimes - CC complex
- Climate Data:
- station-based datasets (land based observation - temp, humidity) - might put together to look CC long-period
- Reanalyses - radiosondes = balloon instruments into atmosphere measure pressure, temp etc - launched sites world - satellite - 3D atmosphere/ocean observation/modelling
- paleoclimate reconstructions - proxies like oxygen isotopes in ice cores
- Climate Modelling:
- energy balance models (EBMs) earth’s surface energy budget
- earth system models of intermediate complexity (EMICs) - representations atmosphere, ocean, land, sea ice etc - simple representations
- more complex are coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models (GCMs) - 3 spatial dimensions simulate ocean/atmospheric motions
- Earth System Models (ESMs) latest GCMs - add atmospheric chemistry, ocean biochemistry
- Regional climate model (RCM) - smaller processes simulated
- models constructed coding, often built on from years back, work modularly eg. ocean one module - uncertainty what models of processes to include, what components make overall model realistic
- climate models used to learn about observations, seek explanations, make predictions
- models evaluated throughout development - degree similar climate system - compare a model to a past trend to see adequate / levels confidence data produces.
- Change only valid if impact internal variability is less 10% - less 1% chance temp increase is internal - IPCC conclusions stronger over time - 5th report probability over 95% half increase temp since 1950 due humans
- models projection - uncertainties = structural (form model equations take/solved), parameter, initial condition, probabilistic uncertainty estimates used in projections - not full certainty
- controversies:
- Tropospheric temp - models show rising GHGs = warming troposphere - satellite observations showed lack warming = deniers jump on
- Hockey strick - paleoclimate reconstructions = hockey stick graph - critiqued need more proxies than used
- climategate controversy - 2009 emails UEA climatic research unit made public
- Hiatus controversy - temp increase big 90s, less 90s-10s - claim GW stopped, climate models flawed predicted more warming - problem graphs shared public/policy average projections - variability
Hulme (2009) Social meanings of climate
- often said need climatic stability for societal stability - climate good/bad = human judgement - climate is not weather, can’t use sense to see it like rain - climate is abstract, cannot be directly measured eg can measure temp certain place certain time but not average condition weather period years
- climate is physical and cultural (eg how think about sahara)
- physical climate based latitudinal zones sun - hot equator, cold north - greeks temperate, associated N/S danger. 30 year def WMO
- cultural climate - religion eg biblical flood, shape human lives eg Nile and Egypt - bound up national identity and climate extremes linked personal memory New Orleans - climate anxiety. fear extreme weather based God + Nature ideas - beyond control - Gaia idea modern version
- climate as ideology - greeks saw north cold, south too hot justify their hegemony - issues racism connected to climate and mastery of nature - climate to be conquered - wildness of nature, wilderness - Gaia Lovelock - public good
- climate historically linked collapse civilisations - fall roman empire
Anderegg et al. (2010) expert credibility in CC
- climate scientist agreement anthropogenic CC but US public doubt anthropogenic cause / level scientific agreement - 98% consensus science
- small amount sceptics lot media attention and influence
- what constitutes expertise/credibility in scientific research - debates important CC issue decision-making
- skeptics hugely outnumbered scientists but media misunderstanding - nee media reflect weight expert credibility
IPCC (2018) 1.5 degrees special report - summary for policy makers
- humans caused 1 degree, reach 1.5 2030-2052 current rate
- warming human emissions persist centuries long-term climate system damage
- climate models differences climate now, 1.5 and 2 degrees - increase temp, extremes, precipitation, drought
- 1.5 reduces sea level impact, and biodiversity impact
- coral reefs decline 70-90% 1.5 over 99% 2
- Pathway 1.5 degrees CO2 emissions need decline 45% 2010 levels by 2030, net zero 2050 - 2 degrees 25% 2030 and net zero 2070
Waldman (2018)
- UN Climate report - claim 2020s last chance avert devastating impacts
- IPCC report - averting climate crisis requires reinvention global economy - by 2040 global food shortages, inundation coastal cities, refugee crisis
- scientists downplaying threat
- smaller carbon budget report states