climateanalytics.bsky.social
Global climate science and policy institute working to accelerate climate action and keep warming below 1.5°C.
617 posts
9,462 followers
2,486 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Watch this space for more 1.5°C-aligned 2030 and 2035 emissions benchmarks from our tool the 1.5°C national pathway explorer over the next few months.
1p5ndc-pathways.climateanalytics.org
comment in response to
post
According to @climateactiontr, only 14 countries have submitted 2035 NDCs and only one is 1.5°C-aligned (the UK). 179 countries still need to submit in time for adoption at COP30 in Brazil.
climateactiontracker.org/climate-targ...
comment in response to
post
Relying on carbon sinks in the land sector (like forests) to meet emission reduction targets is risky due to high uncertainty and non-permanence.
'Gross' emission reduction targets (excl. LULUCF) show what level of action is needed for fossil fuel and industrial GHG emissions.
comment in response to
post
The factsheets include ‘net’ climate targets – which is how countries often state their NDC commitments.
Net targets combine gross emissions (fossil fuel, industry, agriculture and waste emissions) with land use, land use-change and forestry (LULUCF) emissions or sequestration.
comment in response to
post
To date we have published science-based 1.5°C aligned emissions targets for 7 key countries – both including and excluding LULUCF.
You can find short factsheets on these 7 countries here:
climateanalytics.org/publications...
comment in response to
post
The results in both papers depend on how CMIP6 models capture relevant climate processes over the next decade or so. See Discussion and bsky.app/profile/clim...
Work @ufz.de together with @carlschleussner.bsky.social and @zscheischlerjak.bsky.social
comment in response to
post
Finally, we highlight that the entry time in the 20-year period at 1.5 °C warming should not be mistaken as the timing of the warming level itself, as the latter is placed at the midpoint of the 20-year period.
comment in response to
post
Cannon paper here.
comment in response to
post
It is no small irony that these two important papers have been published on the day countries should've submitted updated NDCs aligned with 1.5°C. Very few countries have done their homework.
comment in response to
post
There is an enormous amount of work going on trying to understand the causes of the recent extreme warming anomalies, and concern is increasing that we may be seeing the early signs of a cloud feedback effect, but this is not certain.
comment in response to
post
Examples of recent changes include the Tonga volcanic eruption, a strong El Niño and the reduction in shipping sulphur emissions. Cannon was only able to consider a few of these factors.
comment in response to
post
CMIP6 models use historical forcing up to 2015. If greenhouse gas concentrations, aerosol emissions and other factors are different after 2015, which is probably the case, further uncertainty is introduced.
comment in response to
post
There are other caveats to the papers. Both depend on the extent to which CMIP6 models capture all climate system processes over the next decade or so (unlikely) AND consider changes in human induced greenhouse gas emissions and aerosols and other factors since 2015 (also unlikely).
comment in response to
post
It is important to highlight however, such 12-month period has occurred in some global temperature datasets, but not in others. In fact, the Cannon study only relies on the two warmest records available.
comment in response to
post
The bottom-line result is that a consecutive 12-month period with monthly warming at or above 1.5°C could indicates a 60-80% probability that the long-term global average annual warming has already reached or exceeded 1.5°C, even taking into account the extreme 2023/2024 El Niño.
comment in response to
post
The second paper by Cannon takes a different approach to a related question – what does the observation of 12 consecutive months with global mean surface temperature at 1.5°C or above mean for the likelihood of exceeding the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit?
comment in response to
post
This paper also shows is that rapid emission reductions aligned with 1.5°C pathways quickly reduces the risk of annual mean warming exceeding 1.5°C after the first single year exceeding 1.5°C.
In other words, mitigation can still limit the risk of breaching the Paris Agreement limit quite quickly.
comment in response to
post
The paper’s conclusion is quite straightforward – unless emissions are reduced very quickly there is a very high likelihood that 2024 is within the first 20yr period where warming reaches the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit.
The higher emissions are in the next decade; the higher the probability.
comment in response to
post
Paper no1 by @bevacquae.bsky.social and colleagues asks what a year where average annual global warming is at or above 1.5°C tells us about the timing of reaching or exceeding the Paris Agreement's longer-term 1.5°C limit.
The 2024 calendar year was the first such year.
comment in response to
post
The Paris Agreement limit is a 20-year or longer average of 1.5°C above pre industrial levels. Working out if we have reached that limit from recent records also means looking at least a decade ahead at the likely warming from current trends in GHG emissions and policy settings.
comment in response to
post
The increasing risk of overshooting 1.5°C due to a lack of action does not mean this limit should be dropped.
Instead, governments must double down on action to reduce CO2 and other GHG emissions to ensure we curb the worst impacts of climate change.
comment in response to
post
Upholding the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit is vital for safeguarding a liveable future, especially for those most vulnerable to climate change.
Backsliding only lets the fossil fuel industry off the hook.
comment in response to
post
As countries set out their revised 2030 and new 2035 climate targets under the Paris Agreement in the coming months, they must ensure these align with the 1.5°C limit.
Our new factsheets set out what this looks like for six key countries.
climateanalytics.org/publications...
comment in response to
post
If these reductions can be achieved (followed by global net zero CO2 emissions by 2050) there is a good chance that human-caused warming can be halted at, or close to, 1.5°C.
Ongoing fossil fuel emissions are what will commit the world to breach 1.5°C – not current GHG levels.
comment in response to
post
While this is ambitious, the @unep.org Emissions Gap Report 2024 shows a 52% reduction in emissions by 2030 is achievable – and better yet, it's affordable.
There is still time to take action to get onto a 1.5°C pathway.
comment in response to
post
To keep 1.5°C within reach, we need to:
-cut GHG emissions in half by 2030, and 60% by 2035 (compared to 2019)
-cut methane emissions a third by 2030
-reach net zero CO2 emissions by 2050 and net zero GHG emissions soon after
-reduce fossil fuel use 40% by 2030 on the road to a full phase out
comment in response to
post
2024 also saw record land and ocean temperatures.
Fuelled by a strong El Niño earlier in the year, these high temperatures spurred ice loss in glaciers and ice sheets worldwide, including Greenland’s ice sheets and Antarctica’s sea ice.
comment in response to
post
Last month a study found that 2023’s high temperatures were further intensified by reduced low-cloud cover.
Though the cause of this is uncertain, alarmingly it could be a feedback from warming. If this trend continues warming may be faster than expected.
comment in response to
post
2024 exceeded the 2023 record, which was driven by:
⛽️ growing GHG emissions and concentrations
♨️ strong El Niño
🚢 drop in aerosol pollution, including from shipping
☀️ solar cycle nearing peak
www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the...