Tweet

Akshat Rathi

21 Oct, 15 tweets, 6 min read

So what to make of the leaked documents that show fossil-fuel rich countries trying to change the language of UN science reports?

Such a scandal, right? Not so quick. But there are important takeaways. 🧵 unearthed.greenpeace.org/2021/10/21/lea…

First of all, as the importance of climate change grows, it's great to see stories that dig into the procedural nitty gritty. It helps bring transparency to a complicated process that involves not just hundreds of scientists but also thousands of diplomats. So kudos on the story!

Why does the process matter? Building science reports under the IPCC framework is quite a unique operation. A big report collates the best climate science done in the preceding 5-6 years. Then there's a much shorter "summary for policymakers" that gets reviewed by all countries.

Why is it unique? Few (if any) science reports, even if it's just the summary, get looked over by all world governments before they are published. But having this step means it's hard for the countries to then question the consensus view on climate change.

@UE

What the @UE investigation shows is that countries fight over all kinds of stuff that seems silly. But can easily be explained.

https://twitter.com/AsherMinns/status/1451069452917817347

https://twitter.com/Oliver_Geden/status/1451192882975502348

And while this is "leaked" these shenanigans do become public eventually

https://twitter.com/Oliver_Geden/status/1451192882975502348

@GlobalCCS

Still, it's great context to have going into #COP26. Throws light on the kinds of positions taken by obstructionist countries like Saudi Arabia, Australia, Brazil; opposition from groups like @GlobalCCS and @OPECnews; and smaller countries like Argentina and Uruguay.

Most comments, however, are constructive. They aimed to ensure that the text, which becomes the encyclopedia of climate science for years, is readable and has addressed diverse points of view.

https://twitter.com/piersforster/status/1451075825802092549

The flipside is that progressive countries also push back.

https://twitter.com/piersforster/status/1451075825802092549

Many climate scientists see this story and think "Why is it news? This happens all the time."

That's right, but it's worth noting that this kind of stuff makes for great drama. It shows the tension inside initially closed doors around an issue that's gaining global importance.

@eroston

The trouble is... it's unclear what if any impact all of this has.

@eroston and I explored how Saudi Arabia tried to mess around with the 2018 UN Special Report on 1.5C--the report that gave the world "net zero by 2050". bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

That said, it must have some impact. I'm still scratching my head over the fact the latest IPCC report that lays down the best climate science published in August does not mention "fossil fuels" in 40-page summary! bloomberg.com/news/features/…

https://twitter.com/lawrencecarter1/status/1451212054635991043

Interesting twist. IPCC reports are typically published in three parts: WG1 is science, WG2 is adaptation, WG3 is mitigation.

Obscuring the source has some benefits, as we know in the peer review process, but I'm not sure it helps at the country level!

https://twitter.com/lawrencecarter1/status/1451212054635991043

@GlobalCCS

Correction: @GlobalCCS wasn't in opposition, but used as evidence to make a point.

Addendum: This is a great thread from Glen on what value to give to these country comments.

https://twitter.com/Peters_Glen/status/1451081116073463812

https://twitter.com/schipper_lisa/status/1451078734564495361

Also worth acknowledging the anxieties that scientists have when they read a story like this

https://twitter.com/schipper_lisa/status/1451078734564495361

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @AkshatRathi

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

21 Oct

#COP26 warning: There's going to be a LOT of media attention. That's very good. But it also means you're going to get a LOT of takes on what it all means.

Going to get a head start and give you THE take.

Ok, not really, but here's a framework to put the takes in their place.🧵

For the uninitiated, which I suspect is >99% of the world, COP is an annual United Nations meeting (except in pandemic years) that creates the space for countries to work together to stabilize global temperatures, adapt to the warming that's inevitable and save the planet.

Do I have your attention now? No, really, that's important. Most COP meetings are so procedurally boring that most news stories about them are equally boring. And that means most news readers don't really care about this planet-saving meeting.

Read 17 tweets

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

16 Sep

@climate

Are you overwhelmed with climate-related news? With climate week next week and COP26 next month, it's about to get a lot busier.

@climate has created a way to follow your favorite topics. Links in 🧵

@NatBullard

If you'd like general updates from our writers, best sign up to our daily newsletter. You'll get a daily digest of stories and interesting essays right in your inbox bloomberg.com/account/newsle…

Hear from @NatBullard @eroston @LauraMillanL @kmac @GernotWagner @Jess_Shankleman & more

@danahull

If you'd like updates about how the transport sector is being cleaned up, from cars to pick ups and tractors to planes. Sign up to the daily Hyperdrive newsletter bloomberg.com/account/newsle…

Hear from @danahull @colinmckerrache @nicola_news @JamesTFrith @gablova @dimitrakny & more

Read 8 tweets

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

9 Aug

Do not miss it. The IPCC report has made the strongest case yet to cut methane emissions at scale and quickly.

Why? We need jump a few hurdles to understand. 🧵bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

IPCC scientists found that humans have already pumped enough greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to heat the planet 1.5°C—a crucial threshold in the Paris Agreement.

But observable warming is only 1.1°C. So what's happening?

Tiny aerosols, much of which create deadly air pollution, are stopping all of the sun's light from reaching the surface. That means greenhouse gases, which have the ability to retain the heat, aren't retaining as much as they would without the aerosols.

Read 6 tweets

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

9 Aug

@eroston

Breaking: The IPCC report is out. Scientists reach “unequivocal” consensus on human-caused climate change.

@eroston and I break it down for you: bloomberg.com/news/features/…

Thread below with five takeaways

1. The last decade was hotter than any period in 125,000 years. CO2 levels are higher than any time in 2 million years. Methane and nitrous oxide are higher than any time in 800,000 years. And almost all of it is because of human activities, largely from burning fossil fuels.

2. Scientists can now link specific weather events to human-made climate change. They can now point to some extreme weather events, such as the heat dome over North America earlier this year, and say it would have been “virtually impossible” without climate change.

Read 6 tweets

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

4 Aug

Too often the word "unproven" or "nascent" is found near the phrase "carbon capture". But it's wrong.

You can use "not at a large enough scale", "tied to fossil-fuel interests", "extending the fossil-fuel era", "necessary but not sufficient" or even "expensive"...

Carbon capture technology, which traps carbon dioxide from power plants or factories, has been in commercial use for 50 years and it's used to bury 35+ million tons of CO2 each year today.

What more do you need it to be not "unproven" and "nascent"?

I understand the frustration among many who look at oil and gas industry's attempts to use the excuse of scaling carbon capture as a way of finding excuses to reduce emissions.

But that's not the technology's fault. It's the industry's fault. Target your fury to the right place.

Read 15 tweets

Akshat Rathi

@AkshatRathi

20 Jul

@KarolineCQKan

The photos/videos coming from the flood in Henan province in China are quite scary. mp.weixin.qq.com/s/fVyEZ5rLOQSZ… ht @KarolineCQKan

Henan province is home to 94 million people. The capital Zhengzhou received 200 mm of rainfall in one hour on Tuesday.

This unconfirmed video is thought to be from inside the subway in the province.

More about the floods here: reuters.com/business/envir…