Thread by @Peters_Glen

Limiting global warming to 1.5˚C is almost certainly not going to happen. Admitting that need not end hope.

@drvox with a few hard truths [widely agreed, rarely admitted]

1/

vox.com/energy-and-env…

"Lots of people in the climate world — not just activists and politicians, but scientists, journalists, and everyday concerned citizens — have talked themselves into a kind of forced public-facing optimism, despite the fears that dog their private thoughts."

/2

[When I sit in meetings with climate researchers from multiple disciplines, if the question is asked "will we keep below 1.5C?", no one ever says yes. Yet, if you read papers, reports, etc, 1.5C is always "feasible". I find this problematic.]

/3

"Nobody really knows what might work to get the public worked up about climate change the way the problem deserves. Maybe advocates really do need to maintain a happy-warrior spirit; maybe a bunch of dour doomsaying really will turn off the public."

/4

"[I]t is not the job of those of us in the business of observation & analysis to make the public feel or do things. That’s what activists do. We owe the public our best judgement ... even if it might make them sad, & ... it looks like the 1.5˚C goal is utterly forlorn"

/5

From one of my blogs: "I see my role as a scientist to point out the obstacles and challenges, not just tell the positive news stories so others can sleep well at night"

cicero.oslo.no/no/posts/klima…

/6

"As the IPCC showed, with sufficient torturing of climate-economic models, it is still possible to construct a pathway whereby emissions decline at the needed rate"

[One could ask if this is partially the problem?]

/7

"Such scenarios generally involve everything going just right: every policy is passed in every sector, every technology pans out, we take no wrong turns & encounter no culs de sac, & climate sensitivity turns out to be on the lower end of scientific estimates"

/8

[Compare this to the real world, where people elect Trump, Bolsonaro, Morrison, etc. There are always cost overruns. The technology does not work as planned (CCS, BECCS, ...). Policy makers have other priorities (tax cuts, immigration, ...). Models don't model the world!]

/9

"There are lots & lots of ways to reduce suffering that are possible, & have been possible for a long time, & we still don’t do them."

[It is as if we will go to 1.5C with "political will", but let people starve, don't deal with asylum seekers, continue to have wars, ...🤔]

10/

"Look around! The democratic world is in the grips of a populist authoritarian backlash that shows no sign of resolving itself any time soon. Oil and gas infrastructure is being built at a furious pace; hundreds of new coal power plants are in the works."

11/

"No country has implemented anything close to the policies necessary to establish an emissions trajectory toward 1.5˚C; many, including the US & Brazil, are hurtling in the other direction."

[Add Australia]

12/

"What bothers me about the forced optimism that has become de rigueur in climate circles is that it excludes the tragic dimension of climate change and thus robs it of some of the gravity it deserves"

13/

"Saying that we are likely to miss the 1.5˚C target is an unpopular move in the climate community. It solicits accusations of “defeatism” and being — a term I have heard too many times to count — “unhelpful.”"

[Yes, this will be my timeline today]

14/

"As a final, practical point, speaking frankly about the extreme unlikelihood of stopping at 1.5˚C (and the increasing unlikelihood of stopping at 2˚C) could affect how we approach climate policy"

[Some studies suggest the fear of SRM could help mitigation, same issue?]

15/

If we say 1.5C is out of reach, "...it shouldn’t have any effect at all on our mitigation policies. In that domain, “as fast as possible” is the only rule that matters."

16/

A good post from @drvox (from 3 Jan, I was a bit slow), & I recommend reading it all...
vox.com/energy-and-env…

My views on the same issue cicero.oslo.no/no/posts/klima…

17/17