I turn 74 next month, I have been worried about the environment and climate change since reading the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth in the 1970s.
In 1972, three scientists from MIT created a computer model that analyzed global resource consumption and production. Their results shocked the world and created stirring conversation about global ‘overshoot,’ or resource use beyond the carrying capacity of the planet. Now, preeminent environmental scientists Donnella Meadows, Jorgen Randers, and Dennis Meadows have teamed up again to update and expand their original findings in The Limits to Growth: The 30 Year Global Update.
I first visited the Great Barrier Reef in 1964 as a young sailor on the Royal Australian Navy survey ship HMAS Gascoyne.
I was amazed at the stunning beauty of the corals and fish on the Great Barrier Reef. We were using charts made by Captain Cook and were most likely the first humans to see some parts of the reef, it was in pristine condition.
When I retired my wife and I settled in Cairns and I took my grandkids to the reef to show them it’s wonders. The reef had suffered coral bleaching for the first time. I was shocked at the damage rising ocean temperatures had caused, the change I had witnessed in my lifetime was shocking.
I have four great grandchildren now and I fear for the future we are leaving to them and future generations. It’s not just coral that is dying most of the Australian ecosystems are collapsing.
The world is beginning to recognise the huge problems we are leaving to our children and future generations. At the recent G7 meeting in the UK political leaders promised to move rapidly to Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050.
The Australian government refused to commit to Net Zero and is in fact determined to encourage more investment into fossil fuels.
It’s hard to understand how politicians can ignore the scientists and put our children’s future at such a great risk for short term profit. Australia has tremendous opportunities in clean energy creating millions of jobs as Ross Garnaut has recently written about in his book Super-Power.
The fog of Australian politics on climate change has obscured a fateful reality: Australia has the potential to be an economic superpower of the future post-carbon world.
We have unparalleled renewable energy resources. We also have the necessary scientific skills. Australia could be the natural home for an increasing proportion of global industry. But how do we make this happen?
In this crisp, compelling book, Australia’s leading thinker about climate and energy policy offers a road map for progress, covering energy, transport, agriculture, the international scene and more. Rich in ideas and practical optimism, Superpower is a crucial, timely contribution to this country’s future.
We are witnessing an unprecedented crime against humanity. Fossil fuel corporations are donating millions of dollars to influence our politicians. Rarely do journalists call them out and in fact the Murdoch press cheers them on.
In 2017, the heat waves, extreme wild fires, and flooding around the world confirmed beyond doubt that climate disruption is now a full-blown emergency.
We have entered Churchill’s “period of consequences”, yet governments have simply watched the disasters magnify, while rushing ahead with new pipelines and annual trillions in fossil fuel subsidies.
Governments simply cannot say they did not know. The events we are seeing today have been consistently forecast ever since the First Assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was signed by all governments back in 1990, which The Lancet has described as the best research project ever designed.
Unprecedented Crime first lays out the culpability of governmental, political and religious bodies, corporations, and the media through their failure to report or act on the climate emergency. No emergency response has even been contemplated by wealthy high-emitting national governments. Extreme weather reporting never even hints at the need to address climate change.
It then reports how independently of governments, scores of proven zero-carbon game changers have been coming online all over the world. These exciting technologies, described in the book, are now able to power both household electricity and energy-dense heavy industry.
We already have the technical solutions to the CO2 problem. With these solutions we can act in time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to near-zero within 20 years.
These willful crimes against life itself by negligent governments, oblivious media and an insouciant civil society are crimes that everyday citizens can nonetheless readily grasp – and then take to the streets and to the courts to protest on behalf of their children and grand-children.
This thoroughly researched and highly-documented book will show them how.Crimes against humanity
Working together at the United Nations we set 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Goals for a sustainable future. We must hold our politicians accountable and demand they act now for our children and future generations.
COVID-19 reminds us that shocks can cascade and compound in complex ways, with broad fiscal, economic, financial and social implications. Understanding this trend is especially important considering the looming threat of climate change.
The COVID-19 pandemic has dealt with the most severe blow to the global economy since 1929, with devastating, long-lasting effects on government balance sheets. While the impact of the pandemic has been unprecedented in scale and type, the systemic crises stemming from it are likely to happen more often in our modern, interconnected world. COVID-19 reminds us that shocks can cascade and compound in complex ways, with broad fiscal, economic, financial and social implications.
Understanding this trend is especially important considering the looming threat of climate change.
In arecent report, the World Meteorological Organization reminded us of the “relentless” intensification of the climate crisis, with arecord-breakingnumber and intensity of extreme weather events in 2020, along with the compound climate, health, and economic crises experienced in many countries.
So how can countries strengthen their financial resilience to more complex shocks?
How can central banks and financial regulators adapt supervisory frameworks and practices to address compound risks posed by pandemics and climate change?
Recognizing these risks and embedding them within financial risk management frameworks are a crucial starting point. But shocks tend to be seen in isolation and our ability to measure, monitor, and anticipate them is currently limited. So how can we be better prepared for future crises?
Capturing compounding pandemic and climate shocks
The World Bank’sDisaster Risk Financing and Insurance Program(DRFIP) has provided governments with risk analytics and advisory services to strengthen their financial resilience to disasters and climate shocks for over a decade. This is a critical part of a green, resilient and inclusive post-COVID recovery. The DRFIP partnered with Ca’ Foscari University of Venice in a project to explore the impacts of compound shocks. Under this project, we’ve added risk transmission channels for climate, economic, and health shocks, and developed a framework for capturing compound shocks within a macro-financial risk assessment. (Figure 1)
Figure 1: Compound risk transmission channels. The figure shows the COVID-19 and natural hazard shock entry points (black dotted boxes) and transmission channels to the main variables of the real economy, public and private finance. Direct impacts are identified by the light green dotted box, while indirect impacts are identified by the purple dotted box. The red arrow shows the reinforcing feedback loop, while the shaded red areas identify the compound effect.
When pandemic and extreme weather events compound within an economy, they generate non-linear effects that can amplify economic losses (e.g., measured in terms of GDP): the compound impacts can be larger than the sum of the individual shocks. We measured this as a compound risk multiplier (Figure 2) and found that it can peak at over 150% in some cases; that is, compound impacts can be 50 percent larger than the sum of the individual shocks—which is a pretty big blind spot!
Figure 2: Compound risk multiplier for two example middle-income countries, where one is exposed to a flood shock (Country A) and the other a typhoon shock (Country B) during a pandemic. The compound risk multiplier is computed as the ratio between the GDP loss in the compound risk scenario and the sum of GDP losses in individual pandemic and climate risk scenarios. When the compound risk multiplier is higher than 100, this indicates non-linearities emerging that cause the shock triggered to be higher than the sum of the individual shocks.
For governments, compounding shocks have two different implications. They amplify the economic impacts of individual shocks and so will impact government revenues harder and for longer. They also increase the need for government expenditure post-disaster, particularly in areas like social protection and recovery finance for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).
Building a more resilient future
Ignoring the potential of compounding risks could be a major blind spot in the COVID-19 recovery. Economic and financial risks, climate change, environmental damage, and public health emergencies are all interconnected.
Disregarding these interlinkages and their compounding effects limit effective policy making and financial risk management. Building back stronger means taking a more integrated approach to risk management.
There are still questions to be addressed. For example, what does this mean for the design of climate-resilient financial instruments, such as contingent credit and insurance, to better manage these (compound) risks?
One conclusion is clear: Developing simple yet realistic scenarios and metrics and integrating them more explicitly within financial risk management frameworks could be a meaningful first step toward enhanced financial resilience. This would help limit the impact of future crises and incentivize economy-wide investments to reduce risks.
Acknowledgements:The research underpinning this blog included contributions from Antoine Bavandi and Fabio Cian from the World Bank, and Monica Billio, Stefano Battiston, Louison Cahen Fourot, Nepomuk Dunz, Arthur Hrast Essenfelder, Andrea Mazzocchetti and Malcolm Mistry from Ca’ Foscari University of Venice. The research was funded by the Global Risk Financing Facility.
This post is part of a series featuring the World Bank Group’s climate-related work in the Equitable Growth, Finance and Institutions practice group including the following Global Practices: Governance; Finance, Competitiveness and Innovation; and Macroeconomics, Trade and Investment.
The two leading science groups studying ecosystems and climate urged protection of carbon-rich habitats and warned against solutions to warming that lower species diversity.
Slowing global warming and stemming the loss of biodiversity have been viewed as independent challenges for years.
But a new landmark report concludes that climate change and the rapid decline of natural ecosystems are intertwined crises that should be tackled together if international efforts to address either are to succeed.
The report, released Thursday, was written by 50 of the world’s leading experts on biodiversity and climate change, representing two major international scientific groups collaborating for the first time: the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The findings emerged from a workshop held in December and months of subsequent research, and come as leaders gear up for two major upcoming United Nations conferences, one focusing on biodiversity and the other on climate change.
Until now, the authors of the report said, global collaborative efforts to address climate change, through platforms including the IPCC and the Paris climate agreement, have operated on a different track from efforts to address biodiversity, carried out through the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and other international organizations.
“For far too long we’ve tended to see climate and biodiversity as separate issues, so our policy responses have been very siloed,” said Pamela McElwee, one of the report’s authors and an associate professor in the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers University. “Climate has simply gotten more attention.”
Some key efforts can contribute to both the preservation of biodiversity and controlling global warming, especially stopping deforestation in the tropics, but also halting the degradation of other carbon-rich ecosystems, including mangroves, peatlands, savannahs and wetlands. The authors say that ramping up sustainable agriculture and forestry, while cutting subsidies to destructive industries, will also be critical.
In 2017, the heat waves, extreme wild fires, and flooding around the world confirmed beyond doubt that climate disruption is now a full-blown emergency.
We have entered Churchill’s “period of consequences”, yet governments have simply watched the disasters magnify, while rushing ahead with new pipelines and annual trillions in fossil fuel subsidies.
Governments simply cannot say they did not know. The events we are seeing today have been consistently forecast ever since the First Assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was signed by all governments back in 1990, which The Lancet has described as the best research project ever designed.
Unprecedented Crime first lays out the culpability of governmental, political and religious bodies, corporations, and the media through their failure to report or act on the climate emergency. No emergency response has even been contemplated by wealthy high-emitting national governments. Extreme weather reporting never even hints at the need to address climate change.
It then reports how independently of governments, scores of proven zero-carbon game changers have been coming online all over the world. These exciting technologies, described in the book, are now able to power both household electricity and energy-dense heavy industry.
We already have the technical solutions to the CO2 problem. With these solutions we can act in time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to near-zero within 20 years.
These willful crimes against life itself by negligent governments, oblivious media and an insouciant civil society are crimes that everyday citizens can nonetheless readily grasp – and then take to the streets and to the courts to protest on behalf of their children and grand-children.
This thoroughly researched and highly-documented book will show them how.
“We are seeing multiple impacts of climate change on all continents and in all ocean regions. These increasingly add to the enormous human pressure on biodiversity,” said Hans-Otto Pörtner, a climatologist and previous IPCC author who co-chaired the steering committee of the collaborative workshop. “So far conservation efforts have not been sufficient. Human society depends on the services that nature provides, but climate change has caused loss in natural resources, especially those that are overused.”
Pörtner also pointed out that pandemics are linked to biodiversity loss because zoonotic diseases emerge from species that thrive when biodiversity declines. “Climate change and biodiversity loss are threatening human well being as well as society. They’re closely interwoven and share common drivers through human activity,” he said. “They’re reinforcing each other.”
The authors warned that some efforts to address the climate crisis could be detrimental to biodiversity, and they urged policy makers, governments and industries to avoid solutions that could effectively backfire. These include planting monocultural, non-native trees or vast tracts of land with crops for bioenergy.
“There are a lot of things being done for climate change, especially around adaptation, and many of them can be negative for biodiversity,” said Paul Leadley, a professor of ecology with the University of Paris Sud-France. “There’s a real risk that biodiversity can die from a thousand cuts.”
Almut Arneth, one of the authors and a modeling expert at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, said that one of those adaptive efforts, planting bioenergy crops, could eventually require a land area twice the size of India. “On the other hand, we’re using much more than 50 percent [of the world’s land] for food and timber production,” Arneth said. “So as you can imagine planting those large bioenergy crops will put enormous pressure on existing natural land, which would be catastrophic for biodiversity” and for food security.
Nature-Based Solutions Are Not Enough
While the report pointed to solutions, including cutting deforestation, the authors stressed that “nature based solutions” could only go so far.
“An immediate conclusion is that maintaining biodiversity and its functions relies on phasing out emissions from the burning of fossil fuels,” Pörtner said. “Nature is offering solutions, which can be helpful if done in parallel with strong emissions reductions.”
Strong policy and action—executed quickly— will be essential to staving off the twin crises, the authors said. They intend the report to provide the current state of thinking on the issue and said they hope it prods policy makers to push for conservation efforts like President Joe Biden’s plan to conserve 30 percent of American lands. The report called for a global effort to conserve up to half the world’s ocean and lands.
“Positive outcomes are expected from substantially increasing intact and effectively protected areas,” the report said. “Global estimates of exact requirements for effectively protected and conserved areas to ensure a habitable climate, self-sustaining biodiversity and a good quality of life are not yet well established but range from 30 to 50 percent of all land and surface areas.”
Australia’s resources minister, Keith Pitt, is urging oil and gas producers to turn the “spotlight” on environmental groups campaigning against an expansion of the fossil fuel industry on climate change grounds.
Keith Pitt
Pitt will use a speech to the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association conference in Perth on Wednesday to rail against “activism” that “ignores the fact that resources development in Australia is carried out safely and responsibly and that Australia’s economy was built off the back of the resources sector”.
In 2017, the heat waves, extreme wild fires, and flooding around the world confirmed beyond doubt that climate disruption is now a full-blown emergency.
We have entered Churchill’s “period of consequences”, yet governments have simply watched the disasters magnify, while rushing ahead with new pipelines and annual trillions in fossil fuel subsidies.
Governments simply cannot say they did not know. The events we are seeing today have been consistently forecast ever since the First Assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was signed by all governments back in 1990, which The Lancet has described as the best research project ever designed.
Unprecedented Crime first lays out the culpability of governmental, political and religious bodies, corporations, and the media through their failure to report or act on the climate emergency. No emergency response has even been contemplated by wealthy high-emitting national governments. Extreme weather reporting never even hints at the need to address climate change.
It then reports how independently of governments, scores of proven zero-carbon game changers have been coming online all over the world. These exciting technologies, described in the book, are now able to power both household electricity and energy-dense heavy industry.
We already have the technical solutions to the CO2 problem. With these solutions we can act in time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to near-zero within 20 years.
These willful crimes against life itself by negligent governments, oblivious media and an insouciant civil society are crimes that everyday citizens can nonetheless readily grasp – and then take to the streets and to the courts to protest on behalf of their children and grand-children.
This thoroughly researched and highly-documented book will show them how.
According to speech notes circulated by his office in advance, the resources minister will declare it is “clear that the courts and bureaucratic processes are being used by green activists to delay major projects and potentially cripple companies”.
He will single out Greenpeace for special mention. Citing figures from the charities commission, Pitt will say Greenpeace “raised more than $18.5m in donations and bequests and $1.1m in government grants in 2019-20 in Australia alone”.
“Nearly 25% of expenses related to fundraising and 39% were in staff costs – so rather than protecting the environment they are mostly focussed on protecting themselves,” Pitt will say.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific chief executive David Ritter hit back. “The very reason that millions of Australians support the work of Greenpeace is to take the action on climate change that minister Pitt’s government has not only resoundingly failed to do, but actively blocked for the past seven years.
“Greenpeace is a movement of people. If these climate-wrecking oil and gas giants at this conference want to rise to minister Pitt’s challenge and attack the people of Australia for caring about nature and the future of our kids, we are ready. Because for as long as big climate polluters threaten the future, we will stand in their way.”
The resources minister will argue demand for LNG is growing in the face of global pushback from environmental and shareholder groups and Australia intends to remain at the “forefront of the LNG sector” for decades.
He will tell the conference the government plans to develop the North Bowen and Galilee basins in central Queensland for gas extraction. “We know that the Bowen Basin is a major coal-producing area but it also has immense potential for gas”.
Pitt will urge oil and gas producers to fight back against “green activists” by putting “facts” before the Australian public, including quantifying the sector’s economic contribution to the country “and indeed facts about the activist’s campaigns – the spotlight should be on those organisations for a change”.
The resources minister will also flag concern about banks and insurers stepping back from financing fossil fuel projects. Pitt triggered a parliamentary inquiry, chaired by fellow Queensland National George Christensen, aftera public commitment from ANZto step back from business customers with material thermal coal exposures –market signallingthatsparked consternation within the Nationals.
After the ANZ’s statement last October, the agriculture minister, David Littleproud, called for a boycott of the bank, and the deputy prime minister, Michael McCormack, declared the bank’s plan “virtue signalling”. Christensen has previouslydenied the linkbetween climate change and the severity of natural disasters.
In the wake of the ANZ fracas, Pitt originally instructed the joint standing committee on trade and investment growth togrill financial regulators, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, as well as the banks, about their plans to pull back on lending or insuring mining projects because of climate change.
Butthe inquiry stalledafter the joint standing committee – in a rare rebuke – deferred making a decision about whether to proceed with Pitt’s original ministerial referral. The stalling reflected a view among some Liberals that the inquiry should not be a witch-hunt against banks managing carbon risk.
Pitt subsequently broadened the terms of reference, asking the committee to investigate finance for all export industries. He said the adjustment was a strengthening of the original terms of reference.
The banks and their lobbying arm, the Australian Banking Association, haveused new submissions to Pitt’s parliamentary inquiryto implicitly rebut claims from senior Nationals that their actions amount to moral posturing or virtue signalling.
The major banks and the ABA have pointed out that current carbon risk practices – namely, disclosing information relating to climate exposures and calculating the potential risk of climate change on their balance sheets – are requirements driven by international governance setting bodies, of which Australian regulators and Australian companies are members.
Pitt will tell the APPEA conference on Wednesday the inquiry led by Christensen will “inquire into and report on the approach and motivations of our financial institutions regarding their investment in Australia’s export industries”.
APPEA has used its submission to the inquiry to argue that environmental groups have “over recent years focused their activism on shareholders and finance sources, like superannuation funds, banks, and other lending facilities” – and have been able to exploit an “information asymmetry”.
The submission says since 2017, shareholder activist groups collectively have submitted 92 resolutions “pertaining to climate change, governance (to facilitate greater shareholder climate change activism) or political lobbying (as it pertains to climate change)” – with nearly 40 resolutions relating to APPEA member activities.
APPEA contends this activity “conveniently ignore[s] the body of evidence that demonstrates the role that natural gas is playing in delivering lower carbon energy security to growing population centres, particularly in our own region” and commitments by the gas industry to the United Nations sustainable development agenda.
APPEA is the peak national body representing upstream oil and gas explorers and producers active in Australia. Member companies account for more than 90% of Australia’s petroleum production.
The federal government is demonstrating why it lacks climate credibility by opening up 80,000 square kilometres of new offshore acreage — an area larger than TAS and ACT combined — to gas exploration, says the Climate Council.
“Prime Minister Scott Morrison talks a big game about Australia’s efforts to curb climate change on the world stage, meanwhile back at home the Morrison government is inviting fossil fuel companies to exploit new gas fields and wasting taxpayer money on polluting energy sources,” said Climate Council acting CEO Dr Martin Rice.
“The world sees through our climate-wrecking hypocrisy and is losing patience with Australia, and it is Australian workers and businesses who will wear the consequences, such as carbon tariffs from G7 economies,” he added.
“The decision to open up new oil and gas exploration, at a time when energy experts, investors, and our strategic allies are all moving away from fossil fuels, goes against all scientific and economic reason,” said Dr Rice.
“Gas drives up electricity prices. Gas is a fossil fuel that worsens climate change. As our trading partners shift away from fossil fuels like coal, our fossil-fuelled economy is becoming increasingly exposed, and vulnerable,” said Dr Rice.
“The science is clear: we need to rapidly reduce emissions this decade, and no new coal, oil, and gas projects are compatible with protecting Australians, our economy and unique ecosystems from worsening climate impacts,” said Dr Rice.
The Climate Council recommends Australia cut its emissions by 75% by 2030 (based on 2005 levels), and reach net zero by 2035.
“By choosing to ignore the experts and passing measure after measure that actively worsens climate change, the Federal Government is exposing Australians to growing economic, diplomatic and climate risks,” said Dr Rice.
Santos, one of the nation’s largest gas producers, has acknowledged the world wants to see a faster transition away from fossil fuels amid historic climate pressure engulfing global energy giants and rising pushback against new gas fields off the coast of Australia.
On the eve of a major industry conference in Perth this week, Santos managing director Kevin Gallagher said oil and gas have probably been the “single biggest boost to living standards in the history of humankind”.
But concerns about climate change have intensified in the past year, he said, and equity investors had “turned off the taps”.
“Whatever the reason, there is no doubt the world wants a faster energy transition and many people see that as a world without fossil fuels,” Mr Gallagher said.
Globally, the world’s biggest oil and gas producers are under increasing pressure to act on climate change, with leading energy analysts openly questioning whether the sector is facing a “watershed” moment.
First, the International Energy Agency released a landmark report warning against investing in new oil and gas fields if the world is to achieve the Paris climate agreement’s aspirational target of limiting global temperatures to 1.5 degrees.
Then, in a landmark ruling, a Dutch court ordered Royal Dutch Shell to set deeper and faster emissions cuts targeting a 45 per cent reduction by 2030, whileExxonMobil, on the same day, was dealt a blowwith an activist fund unseating three board members and installing green-leaning replacements instead.
In Australia, Santos and Woodside Petroleum have been facing renewed pressure from climate advocates over their plans to develop new gas fields off the coast of Australia due to the additional greenhouse gas emissions they would generate.
Santos recently gave the go-ahead to its $4.7 billion Barossa gas project north of Darwin after its plans were put on hold last year amid the coronavirus-driven market crash. Woodside and BHP, meanwhile, are targeting a final investment decision on their $15 billion Scarborough field off the coast of WA.
Shareholder activists at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) have described Barossa as a “carbon bomb”, with carbon dioxide content as high as 19 per cent.
Decades of aggressive marketing to Australians has led to several misconceptions about gas. In reality, gas is far from clean; it is a polluting fossil fuel that is already harming our health, wellbeing and, of course, the climate. With more gas in the mix, this risk of harm only increases.
This report is about Australia’s gas industry, the threat it poses to our health, and the way out: of kicking the gas habit for a cleaner, healthier, and more prosperous future.
“This company is not committed to the Paris Agreement, but to climate chaos,” the group’s climate director Dan Gocher said.
“Institutional investors are demanding credible transition plans. Santos continues to fail on this measure.”
In WA, environmental groups have initiated legal action in the state’s Supreme Court seeking to overturn approvals already issued to Woodside for its Scarborough project, arguing regulators failed to sufficiently assess the impact on global warming.
The climate push against the industry could have significant implications for Australia, which counts liquefied natural gas (LNG) as one of its most valuable exports.
Gas firms say demand has been rebounding swiftly after collapsing last year amid global COVID-19 lockdowns, and forecast consumption to remain strong as Asian nations turn to the fossil fuel for a cheap, reliable and less-emitting alternative to coal.
“In fact, Australian liquefied natural gas is helping to reduce emissions in importing countries by about 170 million tonnes each year,” the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association’s Claire Wilkinson said.
In the longer term, however, the industry is facing deepening questions about the role of gas in a rapidly decarbonising world. Investors are voicing concerns about the fuel’s emissions footprint and the risk of new gas fields becoming stranded assets under the Paris agreement’s goals to slow global warming.
“We are Australia’s third-biggest export industry, bringing in around $50 billion in export income last year,” Mr Gallagher said on Monday.
“I am confident that APPEA and our members can continue to play a vital role in Australia’s future through to 2050 and beyond.“
There’s a new climate war and it’s being driven by disinformation, according to a new book by the climate scientist Michael Mann. That’s why science, knowledge and media literacy matter — and why Greta Thunberg matters.
Psst.What have you, yourself personally done for the environment lately?
Wrong question!
That’s the question the oil companies, big tech and the fossil fuel industry want you to ask. Because it takes the heat off them.
Like all of us — well, most of us on Vocal, anyway — I’ve struggled with my carbon footprint and what kind of world I’m likely to leave behind for my children, my grandchildren, my friends’ grandchildren and everyone’s grandchildren.
I try to source food locally, I try to eat less meat, I drive less and walk or cycle whenever I can (I live in downtown in a big city), and I’ve tried to cut single-use plastic out of my life. My local supermarket chain doesn’t make that last part easy.
Sourcing food locally is important because it leaves a lighter footprint in transportation costs.
Eating less meat — or, preferably, cutting meat out of one’s diet altogether — is important because chicken farms, pig farms and cattle ranches chew up more resources and use more land than fruit crops and vegetable farms.
Getting rid of single-use plastic speaks for itself — discarded plastic is killing our oceans, together with overfishing and ocean acidification caused by global heating — and in fact plastic, an oil product, is killing the entire planet, through sheer overuse.
Overpopulation, while not helpful, is not as big a problem as overconsumption. You rarely hear the oil companies, big tech or the fossil fuel industry talk about overpopulation, but youneverhear them talk about overconsumption.
In fact, if you’re reading and creating on Vocal, chances are you’re using a screen, and screens — especially smartphones — are a drain on mineral resources like copper, lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel and tungsten, as well as precious metals like tellurium, coltan, tantalum and silicon.
Apple, Samsung and the others tell you that you must replace your smartphone every 4 years to stay up to date, every 2 years if you want to stay cool.
That’s a problem, because many of the precious metals that go into smartphones are mined from the ground in places like Democratic Republic of the Congo, a sprawling, ungovernable country of 900,000 square miles (2 million sq kms) of tropical rainforest riven by corruption, inequality, death squads, armed militias and endless civil war. DRC is a failed state waiting to happen, and yet its resources power your and my communications.
A renowned climate scientist shows how fossil-fuel companies have waged a thirty-year campaign to deflect blame and responsibility and to delay action on climate change, and offers a battle plan for how we can save the planet.
Recycle. Fly less. Eat less meat. These are some of the ways that we’ve been told can slow climate change. But the inordinate emphasis on behaviour is the result of a marketing campaign that has succeeded in placing the responsibility for fixing climate change squarely on the shoulders of individuals.
Fossil-fuel companies have followed the example of other industries deflecting blame (think ‘Guns don’t kill people, people kill people’) or greenwashing. Meanwhile, they’ve blocked efforts to regulate or price carbon emissions, have run PR campaigns aimed at discrediting viable alternatives, and have abdicated their responsibility to fix the problem they’ve created.
InThe New Climate War, Mann argues that all is not lost. He draws the battle lines between the people and the polluters – fossil-fuel companies, right-wing plutocrats, and petro-states. And he outlines a plan for forcing our governments and corporations to wake up and make real change, including:
a common-sense, attainable approach to carbon pricing – and a revision of the well-intentioned
but flawed currently proposed version of the Green New Deal;
allowing renewable energy to compete fairly against fossil fuels;
debunking the false narratives and arguments that have worked their way into the climate debate and driven a wedge between even those who support climate-change solutions;
and combatting climate doomism and despair-mongering.
With immensely powerful vested interests aligned in defence of the fossil-fuel status quo, the societal tipping point won’t happen without the active participation of citizens everywhere aiding in the collective push forward. This book will reach, inform, and enable citizens everywhere to join this battle for our planet.
According to a new book,The New Climate War, by the pre-eminent climate scientist Michael E. Mann, these are all important questions —but— and this is the part you need to know:It’s not your fault!
Not entirely, anyway.
It’s partly your fault — we’ve all done our part to drive the climate crisis — but what you do every day pales in comparison to what the oil companies, big tech and the fossil fuel industry do every hour.
And they don’t want you to know that.
By shifting the blame onto you, Dr. Mann writes, the oil companies, big tech, the fossil fuel industry and the politicians and media moguls who run cover for them are subtly shifting the argument away from who’s really at fault here —them— and laying a guilt trip onyou, by guilt-tripping you into looking in the mirror and blaming yourself.
By asking what you did for the environment today, they’re subtly forcing you to take a look in the mirror and ask yourself if you’re the reason the oceans are dying, the weather is suddenly volatile, and polar bears face extinction in our lifetime. (No ice in summer, no ice cover to hunt seals; no way to hunt seals, no food to eat; no food to eat, no way to be healthy enough to reproduce. The end.)
Polar bears are just one example, of course.
There are countless others — virtually every iconic animal you fell in love with as a child and went to the zoo to see, from lions, tigers and elephants to gorillas and, yes, polar bears.
The ultimate handbook of irrefutable facts for saving the planet and fighting against climate change.
How canwesave our planet and survive the 21st century?
How canyouargue with deniers?
How canwecreate positive change in the midst of the climate crisis? Professor Mark Maslin has the key facts that we need to protect our future.
Global awareness of climate change is growing rapidly. Science has proven that our planet and species are facing a massive environmental crisis.How to Save Our Planetis a call to action, guaranteed to equipeveryonewith the knowledge needed to make change.
We need to deal with: climate change, environmental destruction, global poverty and ensure everyone’s security.
We have the technology.
We have the resources.
We have the money.
We have the scientists, the entrepreneurs and the innovators.
We lack the POLITICS AND POLICIES to make your vision of a better world happen.
This is your go-to handbook for saving our precious planet. From the history of our planet and species, to the potential of individuals and our power to create a better future, Maslin inspires optimism in these bleak times. It’s time to face the facts and save our planetfrom, andfor, ourselves.
Dr. Mann is outspoken, charismatic and witty, willing to engage with everyone from social media trolls to Bill Gates, who he’s feuding with. Bill Gates is a rich guy with a lot of opinions; Michael Mann is a scientist. When asking yourself who you should believe on climate science, ask yourself which one owns a bicycle (actually Dr. Mann owns three) and which one flies a private jet.
The New Climate Waris not a lecture, or an empty screed. It explains how each and every one of us can fight back against the vested interests of Big Oil — in short, change the way things are done if we are to avert climate catastrophe.
Yes, he wants to sell books, but this is not about the money.
At its heart, whatThe New Climate Wartells us is that social media trolls, Big Oil, Big Pharma and Big Media have convinced us that it’s already too late, that anything we do is hopeless, so why should we wreak the economy just to save a few sea gulls? This campaign of disinformation is the same argument the tobacco industry used not so many years ago to discredit the harm caused by cigarettes.All through human history, wherever scientific findings are on a collision course with powerful vested interests, there is an effort to undermine and attack the science.
Ask yourself, the next time you see a news story about an “extreme weather event” or a new temperature record broken — high or low — what’s really going on.
“There is as much consensus among the worldʼs scientists about climate change as there is about gravity,” Dr. Mann writes in his book. “These vested interests canʼt deny the problem any more, so theyʼve turned to these insidious, and in many ways quite nefarious, new tactics in their effort to block meaningful action.”
Recycling more, flying less and changing our diets are just some of the ways weʼve been told we can slow climate change. For Dr Mann, this emphasis on individual behaviour is the result of a no-so-subtle marketing campaign designed to deflect blame away from fossil fuel companies and towards individuals — you and me.
Listen, behavioural changesarepart of the solution —but— there is no way to tackle climate change without a substantive, funadmental change in public policy.
“We will only get that from policies and politicians who are willing to act on our behalf, rather than the polluters’ behalf.”
We need to push back against “doomism,” Dr. Mann insists — this idea that trying to take on climate change is pointless because it’s already too late.
And this is where Greta Thunberg — she turned 18 just this past January — comes in. The Climate Kids are cause for cautious optimism, he says, by turning the conversation toward whether it’s fair or right that the younger generation — and their kids, and their kids’ kids — are going to have to deal with this mess, all because a handful of big corporations want to make money.
Greta Thunberg, Vanessa Nakate, Alexandria Villaseñor, Autumn Peltier and there are many, many others, are the difference makers.
Dr. Mann again. “There is a moral authority that comes from children speaking out, and we need to support them to make sure their efforts are not in vain. They have cracked open the door for us and now we have to walk through it, which means using our voices and our votes, pressurizing politicians, speaking out and doing everything to raise awareness about the crisis.”
Remember that the next time someone tries to tell you the situation is hopeless, even if that person is on TV a lot and has a lot of money.
Keeping global warming under 1.5℃ is still achievable with rapid deployment of renewables.
A new report found solar and wind can supply the world’s energy demand more than 50 times over.
By Sven Teske
The International Energy Agency (IEA) last month made global headlines when itdeclaredthere isno roomfor new fossil fuel investment if we’re to avoid catastrophic climate change.
However, our new research suggests the horse may have already bolted. Wefoundeven if no new fossil fuel projects were approved anywhere in the world, carbon emissions set to be released from existing projects will still push global warming over the dangerous 1.5℃ threshold.
Specifically, even with no new fossil fuel expansion, global emissions would be 22% too high to stay within 1.5℃ by 2025, and 66% too high by 2030.
However, keeping global warming under 1.5℃ is still achievable with rapid deployment of renewables. Our research found solar and wind cansupply the world’s energy demandmore than 50 times over.
The stunning potential of wind and solar
While our findings were alarming, they also give us a new reason to be hopeful.
We analysed publicly available oil, gas and coal extraction data, and calculated the future production volume. We worked under the assumption no new fossil fuel extraction projects would be developed, and all existing projects would see production declining at standard industry rates.
We found fossil fuel projects already in the pipeline will, by 2030, produce 35% more oil and 69% more coal than what’s consistent with a pathway towards a 1.5℃ temperature rise.
Fossil fuels are the main driver of climate change, accounting for more than 75% of carbon dioxide emissions. Continuing to expand this sector will not only be catastrophic for the climate, but also for the world’s economy as it locks in infrastructure that will becomestranded assets.
Ultimately, it’s not enough to simply keep fossil fuels in the ground. To meet our climate goals under the Paris Agreement, we must phase down existing production.
Solar and wind power technologies are alreadymarket ready and cost competitive. And as our analysis confirms, they’re ready to be scaled up to meet the energy demands of every person on the planet.
Even after applying a set of robust, conservative estimates that take environmental safeguards, land constraints and technical feasibility into account, we found that solar and wind energy could meet the world’s energy demand from 2019 — 50 times over.
It’s clear we don’t need new fossil fuel development to ensure 100% energy access in the future.
Australia’s laggard status
In Australia, the Morrison government refuses to set new emissions reduction targets, and continues to fundnew fossil fuel projects, such as a A$600 million gas plant in the New South Wales Hunter Valley.
Despite Australia’s laggard status on climate change, there arepositive moveselsewhere around the world.
The Morrison government recently announced $600 million for a major new gas plant.
The progress was evident ahead of the G7 summit this past weekend, where climate change was firmly on the agenda. Ahead of the summit,environment ministersworldwide agreed to phase out overseas fossil fuel finance and end support for coal power.
And inrecent weeks, three global fossil fuel giants – Shell, Chevron and ExxonMobil – faced legal and shareholder rebukes over their inadequate action on climate change.
Coming on top of all that, the IEA last month set out acomprehensive roadmapto achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. It included a stark warning: no new fossil fuel projects should be approved.
Natural carbon storage is key
However, the IEA’s findings contradict our own on several fronts. We believe the IEA underestimated the very real potential of renewable energy and relied on problematic solutions to fill what it sees as a gap in meeting the carbon budget.
For example, the IEA suggests a sharp increase in bioenergy is required over the next 30 years.
This would require biofuels from energyplantations— planting crops (such as rapeseed) specifically for energy use.
But conservationists estimate thesustainable potentialfor biofuels is lower. They also say high volumes of bioenergy might interfere with land use for food production and protected nature conservation areas.
Our research found the exact opposite is needed:rapid phase out of deforestationand significant reforestation alongside the decarbonisation of the energy sector.
Bioenergy should be produced predominantly from agricultural and organic waste to remain carbon neutral.
Likewise, the IEA calls for an extreme expansion of carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects — where carbon dioxide emissions are captured at the source, and then pumped and stored deep in the ground.
In its roadmap, the IEA expects CCS projects to grow from capturing 40 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (as is currently the case), to 1,665 million tonnes by 2030.
This is quite unrealistic, because it means betting on expensive, unproven technology that’s being deployedvery slowlyand is often plagued bytechnical issues.
Establishing natural carbon sinks should be prioritised instead, such as keeping forest, mangrove and seagrass ecosystems better intact to draw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Phasing out early
As a wealthy country, Australia is better placed than most to weather any economic disruption from the energy transition.
Our research shows Australia should phase out fossil fuels early and urgently. The Australian government should also ensure communities and people reliant on fossil fuel industries are helped through the transition.
We must also support poorer countries highly dependent on fossil fuels, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.
There is new international momentum for climate action, and the future of the fossil fuel industry looks increasingly dire. The technologies to make the transition are ready and waiting – now all that’s needed is political will.
While the G7 meeting was unremarkable, there are growing signs of action on coal phaseout – particularly among Australia’s biggest coal customers.
By Ketan Joshi
Last weekend’s G7 summit has turned out relatively similar to many of these types of summits – relatively unremarkable. The seven nations gathered, and several invited guests including Australia, had a series of meeting on major global issues that involved plenty of posturing and not a particularly overwhelming amount of substance.
As I wrote last week, Morrison has been attending these global meet-ups with an increasingly hunched posture on climate and energy.
The characteristic defensiveness was on full display, during a pressconferenceon Sunday, and Morrison pulled out all of the easily-predictedlines:
“Australia has cut emissions by over 20% since 2005. Now that exceeds many of those that will sit around that table today. It’ll exceed many who have made commitments for far greater than that in the future but those countries as yet have not achieved that”
As I wrote last week, this is Morrison’s staffers and wonks using misleading comparisons between countries; specifically in the land-use sector, which has seen its data revised massively over the past years in favour of the government. Look at industrial sectors only, and Australia comes dead last by a comfortable margin.
“See, performance should count as much as ambition. Australia’s performance makes clear that when we make a commitment, we keep it and we deliver on it. And I think that ambition is very important – that is why I’ve said what I’ve said in terms of what we would hope to achieve in terms of a net zero or carbon neutral economy”
In a sense, this is true. And it’s very straightforward to gauge ‘performance. Australia’s Paris agreement target was set in 2015, and since then, we have known that it must be increased to match a 1.5C ambition (from 26% to around 60-70% by 2030). So, how has Australia’s government performed?
After signing the Paris agreement in December 2015, Australia’s emissions should have begun in line with the then-new 26% by 2030 target. They did not – they have only dipped below this trajectory thanks to the impacts of COVID19, and they are forecasted to climb back above within a few years by the government’s own department – putting Australia comfortably off-track to achieve these 2015-era targets, and very much off track to achieve a 1.5C compliant, net zero by 2050 trajectory.
Australian PM Scott Morrison and Energy Minister Angus Taylor love Gas
Hydrogen and CCS as tactical empty promises
Some extremely vague technology partnerships are about the most Australia’s PM can claim from the G7 meetings, each hand-waving away concerns about climate and emissions with hydrogen-fuelled technobabble. A jointstatementwith Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel and astatementabout partnerships with Japan both avoid any reference to substantial targets, exact emissions reductions numbers or short-term changes and actions. Awkward and jarring statements, like “Japan reaffirms its commitment to transition to net zero emissions by 2050. Australia reaffirms its commitment to achieve net zero emissions as soon as possible, preferably by 2050”, abound.
Buried in the statement on Japan is an open door to allow for high-emissions production of hydrogen using fossil fuels, with a vague promise of “substantial carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS)”. How much is that? Considering howcatastrophicallyCCUS is currently overblown, it could be nearly nothing and still be described as “substantial”.
A brilliant example of this is the ‘Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain’ (HESC) project, which is specifically named in Morrison’s weekend press release.
Thisprojectplans to take some of the world’s most wildly carbon intensive substances – brown coal from the Latrobe Valley – and burn enormous quantities of it to make hydrogen to ship to Japan. That comes paired with an extremely improbable (this is being kind) promise to capture all of the carbon involved with this in a Victorian CCS project that is yet to capture a single megagram of carbon after more than a decade.
Limited outcomes but coal’s days are numbered
Australia’s plan to simply continue spinning the wheel was not unique at the G7. “In the face of a perfect storm of planetary crises – the world’s richest democracies have responded with a plan to make a plan”saidLaurence Tubiana, one of the architects of the Paris Climate agreement. A promise made long ago for rich nations to raise $100 billion in finance for poorer countries to take up clean energy remains un-met. Any clear and specific commitments to phase out fossil extraction and burning activities, by fuel or sector, were not made. No phase-out dates for the sales of combustion engines or the shut-downs of coal plants.
“G7 leaders have missed the boat in Cornwall on climate action and setting up success at COP26. Despite talking about the scale of the crisis, few concrete outcomes have been achieved”, Catherine PEttengell, Climate ACtion Network UK Interim DirectortoldMegan Rowling, at Reuters.
However, the agreements that were made, while insufficient, were not nothing. A strongcommitmentto end the financing of thermal coal power generation this year was made.
“Our immediate assessment is that the G7 have taken good strides forward on each of these coal priorities. There is much more to do, but this package is a strong foundation to build from”, said E3G’s Chris Littlecott.
Most relevant to Australia is this phrase, in the communique: “Domestically, we commit to achieve an overwhelmingly decarbonised power system in the 2030s and to actions to accelerate this”.
This is notable specifically because Japan is a key customer for two of Australia’s biggest exports: coal, and gas. Australia’s thermal coal exports, in particular, are 41% of total thermal coal export value. LNG exports to Japan are 42% of total LNG export value. Completely decarbonising the country’s power sector in the next 10 to 20 years means both export industries will plummet.
Of course, Japan’s leadership is not too keen on a rapid coal phase-out. Japan and the US were named as two key holdouts in setting clear end-dates for the burning of coal for power generation, byPolitico’sKarl Mathisen (Germany insisted it had no role in blocking the setting of a coal phase-out date). Part of this is concern – perhaps somewhat justified – over the risks of a mismanaged transition away from coal. “Aware of the potential political and social consequences of a mismanaged transition from coal, Canada, Germany, the U.K., and the U.S. launched a $2 billion fund to support new industries and retrain workers in developing countries”, wrote Mathisen.
Australia is miles and miles away from these conversations about managing and accelerating the end of coal, even when its leader travels over the world to be right there among it.
Our Shared Agenda for Global Action to Build Back Better
We, the leaders of the Group of Seven, met in Cornwall on 11-13 June 2021 determined to beat COVID-19 and build back better.
We remembered everyone who has been lost to the pandemic and paid tribute to those still striving to overcome it.
Inspired by their example of collaboration and determination, we gathered united by the principle that brought us together originally, that shared beliefs and shared responsibilities are the bedrock of leadership and prosperity.
Guided by this, our enduring ideals as free open societies and democracies, and by our commitment to multilateralism, we have agreed a shared G7 agenda for global action to:
● End the pandemic and prepare for the future by driving an intensified international effort, starting immediately, to vaccinate the world by getting as many safe vaccines to as many people as possible as fast as possible. Total G7 commitments since the start of the pandemic provide for a total of over two billion vaccine doses, with the commitments since we last met in February 2021, including here in Carbis Bay, providing for one billion doses over the next year. At the same time we will create the appropriate frameworks to strengthen our collective defences against threats to global health by: increasing and coordinating on global manufacturing capacity on all continents; improving early warning systems; and support science in a mission to shorten the cycle for the development of safe and effective vaccines, treatments and tests from 300 to 100 days.
● Reinvigorate our economies by advancing recovery plans that build on the $12 trillion of support we have put in place during the pandemic. We will continue to support our economies for as long as is necessary, shifting the focus of our support from crisis response to promoting growth into the future, with plans that create jobs, invest in infrastructure, drive innovation, support people, and level up so that no place or person, irrespective of age, ethnicity or gender is left behind. This has not been the case with past global crises, and we are determined that this time it will be different.
● Secure our future prosperity by championing freer, fairer trade within a reformed trading system, a more resilient global economy, and a fairer global tax system that reverses the race to the bottom. We will collaborate to ensure future frontiers of the global economy and society, from cyber space to outer space, increase the prosperity and wellbeing of all people while upholding our values as open societies. We are convinced of the potential of technological transformation for the common good in accordance with our shared values.
● Protect our planet by supporting a green revolution that creates jobs, cuts emissions and seeks to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees. We commit to net zero no later than 2050, halving our collective emissions over the two decades to 2030, increasing and improving climate finance to 2025; and to conserve or protect at least 30 percent of our land and oceans by 2030. We acknowledge our duty to safeguard the planet for future generations.
● Strengthen our partnerships with others around the world. We will develop a new partnership to build back better for the world, through a step change in our approach to investment for infrastructure, including through an initiative for clean and green growth. We are resolved to deepen our current partnership to a new deal with Africa, including by magnifying support from the International Monetary Fund for countries most in need to support our aim to reach a total global ambition of $100 billion.
● Embrace our values as an enduring foundation for success in an ever changing world. We will harness the power of democracy, freedom, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights to answer the biggest questions and overcome the greatest challenges. We will do this in a way that values the individual and promotes equality, especially gender equality, including by supporting a target to get 40 million more girls into education and with at least $23⁄4 billion for the Global Partnership for Education.
We shall seek to advance this open agenda in collaboration with other countries and within the multilateral rules-based system. In particular, we look forward to working alongside our G20 partners and with all relevant International Organisations to secure a cleaner, greener, freer, fairer and safer future for our people and planet.
HEALTH
6. Our immediate focus is beating COVID-19 and we set a collective goal of ending the pandemic in 2022.
The COVID-19 pandemic is not under control anywhere until it is under control everywhere.
In an interconnected world global health and health security threats respect no borders.
We therefore commit both to strengthen global action now to fight COVID-19, and to take further tangible steps to improve our collective defences against future threats and to bolster global health and health security.
This includes strengthening the World Health Organization (WHO) and supporting it in its leading and coordinating role in the global health system.
ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND JOBS
19. Our plans for the recovery from COVID-19 need to put us on a path to strong, sustainable, balanced, inclusive and resilient growth by not only addressing the immediate challenges arising from the pandemic, but also the long-term shifts in the global economy and society, including demographic, technological, and environmental trends, and inequalities between and within countries, many of which have been magnified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Recognising the interconnected nature of these global challenges, we are taking an integrated approach to our shared commitments.
We need a tax system that is fair across the world. We endorse the historic commitment made by the G7 on 5 June. We will now continue the discussion to reach consensus on a global agreement on an equitable solution on the allocation of taxing rights and an ambitious global minimum tax of at least 15 per cent on a country-by-country basis, through the G20/OECD inclusive framework and look forward to reaching an agreement at the July meeting of G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. With this, we have taken a significant step towards creating a fairer tax system fit for the 21st century, and reversing a 40-year race to the bottom. Our collaboration will create a stronger level playing field, and it will help raise more tax revenue to support investment and it will crack down on tax avoidance.
FREE AND FAIR TRADE
27. We stand united in our commitment to free and fair trade as foundational principles and objectives of the rules-based multilateral system.
We agree on the need for the world’s leading democratic nations to unite behind a shared vision to ensure the multilateral trading system is reformed, with a modernised rulebook and a reformed World Trade Organization (WTO) at its centre, to be free and fair for all, more sustainable, resilient and responsive to the needs of global citizens. We will maintain a particular focus on ensuring that the prosperity trade can bring is felt in all parts of our countries and by all peoples across the globe, especially the poor.
FUTURE FRONTIERS
31. Future frontiers of the global economy and society – from cyber space to outer space – will determine the future prosperity and wellbeing of people all over the world in the decades ahead. As we are witnessing an increasing divergence of models, this transformation raises important questions about the interaction between economic opportunity, security, ethics, and human rights, and the balance between the role of the state, businesses and individuals.
CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT
37. The unprecedented and interdependent crises of climate change and biodiversity loss pose an existential threat to people, prosperity, security, and nature.
Through global action and concerted leadership, 2021 should be a turning point for our planet as we commit to a green transition that cuts emissions, increases adaptation action worldwide, halts and reverses biodiversity loss, and, through policy and technological transformation, creates new high quality jobs and increases prosperity and wellbeing. Ahead of the 15th Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP15), the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (UNFCCC COP26) and the fifteenth session of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD COP15), we commit to accelerating efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and keep the 1.5°C global warming threshold within reach, strengthening adaptation and resilience to protect people from the impacts of climate change, halting and reversing biodiversity loss, mobilising finance and leveraging innovation to reach these goals. We welcome and encourage business, civil society and regional commitments to global climate and biodiversity ambition through science based targets, including the Race to Resilience and Race to Zero campaigns. Together we welcome the active role and participation of vulnerable communities, underrepresented groups and will work towards achieving equality, including gender equality, in the climate and environment sector. We will continue our efforts to progress the Equal by 30 Campaign for gender equality in the energy sector.
38. As G7 members, we all reaffirm our commitment to the Paris Agreement and to strengthening and accelerating its implementation through robust national policies and measures and scaled up international cooperation. To this end we collectively commit to ambitious and accelerated efforts to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible and by 2050 at the latest, recognising the importance of significant action this decade. In line with this goal, we have each committed to increased 2030 targets and, where not done already, commit to submit aligned Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as soon as possible ahead of COP26, which will cut our collective emissions by around half compared to 2010 or over half compared to 2005. We also commit to submit 2050 Long Term Strategies (LTSs) by COP26 and to regularly update these as needed in line with the Paris agreement to reflect the latest science, technological advances and market developments. Recognising the importance of adaptation in our own national planning, we also commit to submitting adaptation communications as soon as possible, and if feasible by COP26. In fulfilling these commitments we will continue to increase our efforts to keep a limit of 1.5°C temperature rise within reach and chart a G7 pathway towards Net Zero economies. We call on all countries, in particular major emitting economies, to join us in these goals as part of a global effort, stepping up their commitments to reflect the highest possible ambition and transparency on implementation under the Paris Agreement. We also note the value of supporting international initiatives such as the OECD’s International Programme for Action on Climate Mechanism (IPAC).
39. To be credible, ambitions need to be supported by tangible actions in all sectors of our economies and societies. We will lead a technology-driven transition to Net Zero, supported by relevant policies, noting the clear roadmap provided by the International Energy Agency and prioritising the most urgent and polluting sectors and activities:
● In our energy sectors, we will increase energy efficiency, accelerate renewable and other zero emissions energy deployment, reduce wasteful consumption, leverage innovation all whilst maintaining energy security. Domestically, we commit to achieve an overwhelmingly decarbonised power system in the 2030s and to actions to accelerate this. Internationally, we commit to aligning official international financing with the global achievement of net zero GHG emissions no later than 2050 and for deep emissions reductions in the 2020s. We will phase out new direct government support for international carbon-intensive fossil fuel energy as soon as possible, with limited exceptions consistent with an ambitious climate neutrality pathway, the Paris Agreement, 1.5°C goal and best available science. To be credible, ambitions need to be supported by tangible actions in all sectors of our economies and societies. We will lead a technology-driven transition to Net Zero, noting the clear roadmap provided by the International Energy Agency and prioritising the most urgent and polluting sectors and activities.
● Recognising that coal power generation is the single biggest cause of greenhouse gas emissions, and consistent with this overall approach and our strengthened NDCs, domestically we have committed to rapidly scale-up technologies and policies that further accelerate the transition away from unabated coal capacity, consistent with our 2030 NDCs and net zero commitments. This transition must go hand in hand with policies and support for a just transition for affected workers, and sectors so that no person, group or geographic region is left behind. To accelerate the international transition away from coal, recognising that continued global investment in unabated coal power generation is incompatible with keeping 1.5°C within reach we stress that international investments in unabated coal must stop now and we commit now to an end to new direct government support for unabated international thermal coal power generation by the end of 2021, including through Official Development Assistance, export finance, investment, and financial and trade promotion support. This transition must also be complemented by support to deliver this, including coordinating through the Energy Transition Council. We welcome the work by the Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) and donors plan to commit up to $2 billion in the coming year to its Accelerating the Coal Transition and Integrating Renewable Energy programs. These concessional resources are expected to mobilize up to $10 billion in co-financing, including from the private sector, to support renewable energy deployment in developing and emerging economies. We call on other major economies to adopt such commitments and join us in phasing out the most polluting energy sources, and scaling up investment in the technology and infrastructure to facilitate the clean, green transition. More broadly, we reaffirm our existing commitment to eliminating inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by 2025, and call on all countries to join us, recognising the substantial financial resource this could unlock globally to support the transition and the need to commit to a clear timeline.
● In our transport sectors, we commit to sustainable, decarbonised mobility and to scaling up zero emission vehicle technologies, including buses, trains, shipping and aviation. We recognise that this will require dramatically increasing the pace of the global decarbonisation of the road transport sector throughout the 2020s, and beyond. This includes support for accelerating the roll out of necessary infrastructure, such as charging and fueling infrastructure and enhancing the offer of more sustainable transport modes, including public transport, shared mobility, cycling and walking. We commit to accelerate the transition away from new sales of diesel and petrol cars to promote the uptake of zero emission vehicles.
● In our industrial and innovation sectors we will take action to decarbonise areas such as iron and steel, cement, chemicals, and petrochemicals, in order to reach net zero emissions across the whole economy. To this end, we will harness our collective strengths in science, technological innovation, policy design, financing, and regulation including through our launch of the G7 Industrial Decarbonisation Agenda to complement, support and amplify ambition of existing initiatives. This includes further action on public procurement, standards and industrial efforts to define and stimulate demand for green products and enhance energy and resource efficiency in industry. We will focus on accelerating progress on electrification and batteries, hydrogen, carbon capture, usage and storage, zero emission aviation and shipping, and for those countries that opt to use it, nuclear power. We therefore fully support launching Mission Innovation phase two and the Clean Energy Ministerial third phase.
● In our homes and buildings, and also industry, we recognise the need for an urgent step change in the deployment of renewable heating and cooling and reduction in energy demand. This complements required shifts in building design, sustainable materials and retrofits. We therefore welcome the Super-Efficient Equipment and Appliance Deployment (SEAD) initiative’s goal of doubling the efficiency of lighting, cooling, refrigeration and motor systems sold globally by 2030.
● In our agricultural, forestry and other land use sectors, we commit to ensuring our policies encourage sustainable production, the protection, conservation, and regeneration of ecosystems, and the sequestration of carbon. We welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues at the COP26 Transition to Sustainable Agriculture Policy Dialogue and UN Food Systems Summit in September.
40. Achieving our collective ambitions of a global green and resilient recovery offers the greatest economic opportunity of our time to boost income, innovation, jobs, productivity and growth while also accelerating action to tackle the existential threat of climate change and environmental degradation. To close the gap between the funds needed and actual finance flows requires mobilising and aligning finance and investment at scale towards the technologies, infrastructure, ecosystems, businesses, jobs and economies that will underpin a net-zero emissions resilient future that leaves no one behind. This includes the deployment and alignment of all sources of finance: public and private, national and multilateral. We recognise the particular challenges of financing the transition to net zero economies poses for developing countries and stand by our bilateral and multilateral commitments to support these partners, in the context of meaningful and transparent decarbonisation efforts. We reaffirm the collective developed country goal to jointly mobilise $100 billion per year from public and private sources, through to 2025 in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation. Towards this end, we commit to each increase and improve our overall international public climate finance contributions for this period and call on other developed countries to join and enhance their contributions to this effort. We welcome the commitments already made by some of the G7 to increase climate finance and look forward to new commitments from others well ahead of COP26 in Glasgow. This increase in quantity and predictability is complemented by improved effectiveness and accessibility, and includes more finance contributing to adaptation and resilience, disaster risk and insurance, as well as support for nature and nature-based solutions. We are committed to further enhance synergies between finance for climate and biodiversity and to promote funding that has co-benefits for climate and nature and are working intensively towards increasing the quantity of finance to nature and nature-based solutions. We welcome efforts of the MDBs to scale up their climate and nature finance, urge them to mobilise increased finance including from the private sector, and call on them, Development Finance Institutions (DFIs), multilateral funds, public banks and relevant agencies to publish before COP26 a high-level plan and date by which all their operations will be fully aligned with and support the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the multilateral
environmental agreements we support.
41. We also support the transformation underway to mobilise further private capital towards these objectives in particular to support developing countries and emerging markets in making the most of the opportunities in the transition; whilst mitigating and adapting to climate change. We call upon the MDBs and our DFIs to prioritise capital mobilization strategies, initiatives and incentives within their operations. The G7 commits to leverage different types of blended finance vehicles including through our greater strategic approach to development finance, greater collaboration between our DFIs and billions worth of planned commitments towards CIF and Green Climate Fund, all of which will mobilise billions more in private finance. We also encourage further development of disaster risk finance markets. Towards this, G7 members have committed hundreds of millions worth of new financing for early action, disaster risk and insurance in line with the InsuResilience Global Partnership and Risk-Informed Early Action Partnership (REAP). We commit to establishing the necessary market infrastructure for private finance to support and incentivise the net zero transition. Developing the global green finance market will help mobilise private sector finance, and reinforce government policy to meet our
net zero commitments. We support the recently launched Glasgow Finance Alliance for Net Zero, and call on swift, robust delivery of their commitments to reduce real economy emissions. We emphasise the need to green the global financial system so that financial decisions take climate considerations into account. We support moving towards mandatory climate-related financial disclosures that provide consistent and decision-useful information for market participants and that are based on the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)
16 framework, in line with domestic regulatory frameworks. We also look forward to the establishment of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures and its recommendations. These initiatives will help mobilise the trillions of dollars of private sector finance needed, and reinforce government policy to meet our net zero commitments. We recognise the potential of high integrity carbon markets and carbon pricing to foster cost-efficient reductions in emission levels, drive innovation and enable a transformation to net zero, through the optimal use of a range of policy levers to price carbon. We underline their importance towards the establishment of a fair and efficient carbon pricing trajectory to accelerate the decarbonisation of our economies, to achieve a net zero global emissions pathway. In all this, we will develop gender-responsive approaches to climate and nature financing, investment and policies, so that
women and girls can participate fully in the future green economy.
42. Biodiversity loss is an intrinsically linked, mutually reinforcing, and equally important existential threat to our planet and our people alongside climate change. In this context, we acknowledge as the G7 our contribution to the decline of biodiversity and pledge to play our part in its restoration and conservation. We support an ambitious post-2020 global biodiversity framework to be adopted by parties at CBD COP15 which sets ambitious goals, strengthens implementation, and enhances regular reporting and review. We acknowledge our responsibility to support the world in reversing the trajectory of the loss of biodiversity and the natural environments that support it, alongside ensuring that the impact on nature is fully taken into account in our policy decision making.
43. In support of strong outcomes for nature at the Convention on Biological Diversity COP-15 in Kunming and COP26 this year, and noting the Leaders’ Pledge for Nature launched at the 75th session of the UN General Assembly 2020, we adopt the G7 2030 Nature Compact in support of the global mission to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. The Nature Compact commits us to take action across four key pillars:
● First, we commit to champion ambitious and effective global biodiversity targets, including conserving or protecting at least 30 per cent of global land and at least 30 per cent of the global ocean by 2030. We will contribute by conserving or protecting at least 30 per cent of our own land, including terrestrial and inland waters, and coastal and marine areas by 2030 according to national circumstances and approaches. These actions will help stem the extinction crisis, safeguard water and food supplies, absorb carbon pollution, and reduce the risks of future pandemics. We also fully support the commitment of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) to develop a representative system of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Convention area in the Southern Ocean based on the best available scientific evidence.
● Second, we will support the transition to sustainable management and use of natural resources, and use appropriate levers to address unsustainable and illegal activities negatively impacting nature, and therefore livelihoods. This includes stepping up action
to tackle increasing levels of plastic pollution in the ocean, including working through the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) on options including strengthening existing instruments and a potential new agreement or other instrument to address marine plastic litter, including at UNEA-5.2.
● Third, we will work intensively towards increasing investment in the protection, conservation and restoration of nature, including committing to increase finance for
17 nature based solutions through to 2025, maximising synergies of climate and biodiversity finance, and ensuring prominence of nature in both policy and economic
decision-making.
● Finally, we will prioritise strengthened accountability and implementation mechanisms of
Multilateral Environmental Agreements to which we are parties. We will implement the Compact and review our progress against it regularly through existing G7 mechanisms, including at the G7 Leaders’ Summit in five years when we will review options to ratchet up our action and ambition, as needed, to ensure delivery of our 2030 vision. Those G7 members party to the CBD will also champion successful implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework to be agreed at COP15.
GENDER EQUALITY
44. Gender equality is at the heart of an open, inclusive, and just society. Persistent gaps in gender equality affect access to basic services as well as decent work, equal pay, social protection, education, technology and many other areas. Unequal division of unpaid care responsibilities in the home and low pay for paid care work also limits women’s empowerment, social and economic participation and leadership. Gender equality intersects with other characteristics and our actions need to take account of these intersections in a meaningful way, including tackling racism in all forms and violence and discrimination against LGBQTI+ populations. We recognise the devastating and disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women and girls, which risks reversing hard-won gains especially with regards to gender-based violence, sexual and reproductive health and rights, education and jobs.
45. The advancement of gender equity and equality are a central pillar of our plans and policies to build back better, informed by three key priorities: educating girls, empowering women and ending violence against women and girls. Achieving gender equality needs to be underpinned by the full, equal and meaningful participation of women in all aspects of decision-making. We are committed to close alignment with the Generation Equality Forum (GEF) and commend the organisation of the first G20 Ministerial Conference on women’s empowerment. We thank the Gender Equality Advisory Council (GEAC) for its work and recommendations, and look forward to receiving the GEAC’s full report in the Autumn. We agree to a consistent and sustained focus on gender equality to project our global leadership on this issue, and intend to convene the GEAC as a standing feature of all G7 Presidencies. We know that we cannot make true progress towards gender equality without robust data and a way to track it over time. We invite the GEAC to work with existing accountability mechanisms such as the Accountability Working Group and the Taormina Roadmap to monitor G7 commitments to achieve gender equality on an annual basis.
46. We reaffirm our full commitment to promote and protect the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) of all individuals, and recognise the essential and transformative role they play
