The Earth flicked briefly into the terrible twos this month. After crossing the symbolic threshold of 1.5 C through September, the global thermometer spiked above the totemic 2 C for two days in November.
There’s nothing magic about round numbers but that one’s a doozy. For more than a decade, world leaders have solemnly pledged to keep temperatures below 2 C — a number that’s been recognized since the 1970s as the outer limit of “dangerous” interference with the climate system. Many countries, notably those most vulnerable, argue 2 C is much too high, and so in Paris, the world agreed to keep the heat “well below 2 C” and to try to stay below 1.5 C.
We should be clear that a couple of days doesn’t mean the global goal is dead. That would require a global temperature averaged over decades. Conveniently for the solemn signatories, we would be long beyond their terms in office, and solidly into the terrible twos before an official determination.
Long before the refs can make an official call, we’d expect to flirt with two degrees, breach the “well below” target occasionally, and then, with ever more regularity.
As Samantha Burgess, deputy director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service puts it, the two-day spike “does not mean the Paris Agreement has been breached but highlights how we are approaching those internationally agreed limits. We can expect to see increasing frequency of 1.5-degree and 2-degree days over the coming months and years.”
So, this first breach should be a real wake-up call, especially in a year tracking so wildly beyond previous records.
A couple of qualifications for those with a nerdy turn of mind. First, 2 degrees compared to what? It’s defined against the baseline of pre-industrial temperatures, before fossil fuel burning began in earnest. Scientists have a pretty good grasp on pre-industrial temperatures, but they can’t be absolutely precise about periods before modern instruments — not to several decimal points of precision. So, it’s quite possible the 2.06 C on Nov. 17 wasn’t the first day in the terrible twos (it could have passed without notice or still be on the way).
And many scientists emphasize two degrees is not some kind of threshold in the real world. That round number is arbitrary, really an artifact of politics and measuring systems (3.6 Fahrenheit isn’t nearly as catchy). There’s no defined cliff we tumble over after 1.49 C or 1.99 C. But breaching those levels is to accept a scale of human suffering and take risks we vowed to avoid.
Having never been down this road before, we can only hope there aren’t some shocking state shifts ahead. There’s good evidence that six of nine crucial “planetary boundaries” have already been transgressed. We’re gambling these flickers above 1.5 and two degrees aren’t “flickerings” — early warning signals, or “wobbles” before a critical transition to a new state.
“Flickering” is one indicator scientists look for as harbingers of critical transitions. We will only know in retrospect, but there is evidence we are nearing several possible tipping points. In a recent article about “flickering,” George Monbiot lists off worrying indicators about the Amazon rainforest and tropical wetlands, as well as peatlands and sea ice in the Arctic, the weakening of the jet stream and ocean circulation, and, of course, this year’s drastic drop in Antarctic sea ice.
Breaking records like a broken record
The UN’s latest update was remarkable for its twist on broken records. Usually such a staid group of scientists, they delivered their new Emissions Gap Report with some serious snark. Broken Record, arrived with a cover image of a disfigured LP record and turntable stylus. The caustic subtitle: “Temperatures hit new highs, yet world fails to cut emissions (again).”
You wonder whether the authors are hopelessly antiquated or hip to the revival of vinyl? And, given what made the cut, you really have to wonder what titles got left behind in the brainstorming session?
“WTF is wrong with you people?” or maybe “Screw it, we quit.”
With exasperation virtually oozing from the page, the scientists write that the world must “change track” or “we will be saying the same thing next year — and the year after, and the year after, like a broken record.”
The world is still “breaking all the wrong records,” finds this latest instalment of the Emissions Gap Report which charts the gap between the current trajectory of emissions and what’s needed to meet the Paris Agreement goals.
The bottom line is “global greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1.2 per cent from 2021 to 2022 to reach a new record of 57.4 Gigatonnes of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (GtCO2e).”
And the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) report finds governments are currently planning to produce over twice as much fossil fuels than if they were serious about limiting warming well below 2 C.
But the authors do underline that “progress since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015 has shown that the world is capable of change.”
Back then, greenhouse gas emissions were projected to increase 16 per cent by the end of this decade. Future greenhouse gas emissions are now projected to increase much less: 3 per cent by 2030. And the aggregate numbers obscure the fact that quite a few big countries are now shrinking the spew instead of increasing it.
What far too few leaders seem to grasp (prefer not to grasp?) is that every delay means an ever-steepening challenge. Canada has the widest emissions gap among the countries UNEP surveyed — a 27 per cent gap between policies in place and international commitments. The U.S. logs the next widest at 19 per cent.
Because of foot-dragging by the provinces and delays in implementing federal policies, the task is much tougher than just a few years ago. “Imagine what we could do as a country if we worked together,” Steven Guilbeault said, responding to the UNEP report.
All the court battles, obstruction of clean energy, delays in implementing policies and widespread lack of serious provincial climate plans mean the math is getting more and more brutal. And the path is steepening rapidly.