Climate change: AHEAD OF SCHEDULE

For all those concerned about the consequences of climate change, it’s no longer a secret that the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement will not be met. In fact, this is what the latest UN report on the subject reveals, exposing a faster than expected pace of global warming, now in an evident process of acceleration. The situation is quite alarming and it has become obvious that it will get worse.

The aforementioned Paris Agreement had set as a limit not to exceed an increase in average global temperature of about 1.5ºC compared to the pre-industrial period. However, from the data now available, it’s already foreseeable that this limit will be reached, and perhaps even exceeded, by the end of this decade or shortly thereafter, that is, much earlier than in all previous forecasts.

Despite world leaders have pledged to avoid at all costs exceeding that limit, it is now clear that those were empty promises and there was not enough commitment. Most of the proclamations made were dictated by political convenience, fueled by campaign rhetoric and disproportionate to the decisions taken, which fell far short of what was necessary. Few truly understood the importance and urgency of the problem.

While experts struggle with uncertain future scenarios, governments are hesitant about the measures to be taken, fearful of affecting their economies and weakening their own political support. Climatically, we are in a serious and terrible emergency, capable of plunging us very soon into unprecedented disasters. Politically, we are mired in multiple games of interests and feeble leaderships. One must fear the worst.

The current plans to make small gradual and cautious changes, even if they go beyond good intentions and become reality, will surely lead us to catastrophe. The reason for this is of a physical and mathematical nature: one cannot stop a phenomenon that is increasingly accelerating with only moderate and gradual measures. In the short term, drastic and rapid cuts in global pollution, and especially in greenhouse gas emissions, are needed, but even that will not be enough to stop the course of climate change. It is not too much to insist that we quickly need new technologies capable of capturing and storing carbon, technologies that must be financed and developed as urgently as possible. They will most likely have to be joined soon by geoengineering solutions.

The swift warming of the planet is already accelerating the rise of sea levels, causing an intense thaw in vast expanses and aggravating extreme phenomena with great destructive power, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, storms and hurricanes. The economic consequences of these phenomena are sometimes, in some places, such as to shake economies and impoverish entire societies, leaving behind a trail of death and devastation; and in the most benign cases, they can lead to a severe reduction in average income per capita. Until recently, the most developed regions of the world believed themselves safe from their worst repercussions, except maybe for very abnormal occurrences. Recent events have shown that this is not the case and that continued and large-scale destruction can also, repeatedly, reach prosperous countries. None will be safe from widespread climate disorder.

If nothing substantial is done, global warming will continue to accelerate and it’s likely to reach an increase of 2°C in relation to pre-industrial times as early as 2040. It may seem little, but half a degree of warming matters – and a lot. By some estimates, the global population exposed to extreme heat waves would more than double; melting in the Arctic, and probably in other regions, could become about ten times more intense and sea levels would probably rise another 6 to 10 centimeters; it would double the extinction of vertebrates and plants and triple the extinction of insects; the percentage of the planet’s area whose ecosystems would become another biome (involving changes in its macroclimate, vegetation cover and soil characteristics) could almost double as well; the amount of permafrost (i.e. permanent ice and frozen soil) that would melt could increase by more than a third; the decline of coral reefs and marine life associated with them would worsen in almost the same proportion; agricultural production of certain crops, as well as fisheries, could fall to about half in many places, especially in low latitudes. In fact, half a degree more of global warming makes a lot of difference, especially if we consider that this warming will not be homogeneous, neither in time nor geographically, and will focus dramatically on certain periods and regions.

What consequences may this have for populations? Mortality and health problems due to extreme weather events will increase; the probabilities of drought or water scarcity will become higher; heavy rains and floods will be more frequent; the smaller amount of ice on the planet will reduce the reflection of sun rays and imply greater heat absorption, generating impacts on ocean circulation and regional climates; rising sea levels will increase coastal erosion, the loss of beaches and littoral territory, and will bring increased risk of flood-tides and greater potential for damage; the disappearance or rarefaction of terrestrial and marine species will harm food chains, economic activities and livelihoods; the alteration of soils and vegetation cover will have a broad impact on local economies and their interactions; the transformation of macroclimates will imply the inadequacy of many traditional forms of housing, as well as the need to adapt buildings and infrastructures, with very heavy costs; and the risks of food shortages will be greater, as will the risks of epidemics, forest fires and pest spread. All this together involves enormous transformations that would take many decades for a gradual and minimally organized adaptation. But if such transformations concentrate on a relatively short space of time, just a decade or two, they have considerable potential for chaos and human suffering, not to mention a possible civilizational retreat in many regions less equipped for such drastic changes. The risk of wars and violent conflicts can’t be ruled out.

Commentators and analysts of these subjects often take just a partial view and repeatedly attribute global warming to emissions of certain greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. But there are other culprits. Current refrigeration gases (widely used in air conditioners, freezers and refrigerators) have a global warming potential 23,000 times greater than carbon dioxide and remain in the atmosphere for 50,000 years. Nowadays, almost all these gases are released when those devices reach their end of life, which highlights the importance of recycling, still very little used due to the lack of incentives. In fact, many people and companies remove the copper from appliances in terminal phase and release the gas into the atmosphere. Although such emissions are generally prohibited, the lack of supervision and fines leads to non-compliance with existing regulations. The consequences are tragic and counterproductive to ongoing efforts. In fact, if we manage to prevent the emission of 23,000 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but we release just one ton of these cooling gases (called "fluorinated gases"), we´ll stay more or less at the same. There will be no progress in reducing emissions, in terms of their thermal consequences. However, it is estimated that, due to the general increase of temperatures, the global energy demand for refrigeration appliances will triple until 2050, what means that production and replacement of cooling devices will be greatly increased henceforth, making even more dramatic the problem of recovering and recycling fluorinated gases at the end of the life cycle of such devices.

Something similar is happening with another gas that intensifies the greenhouse effect, nitrous oxide, which has the particularity of being the one that most contributes to degrading the ozone layer. It has several applications in industry and is also one of the products resulting from burning fossil fuels or biomass, but intensive agriculture is by far the largest responsible for annual emissions as a result of the production and application of synthetic fertilizers on a large scale. Livestock and aquaculture contribute to the problem due to the growing demand for animal feed, and sewage and its treatment are also a source of emissions, as well as poor management of animal manure, garbage and waste in general. Although it exists in lesser amounts in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, this gas has a heat retention capacity 300 times higher (i.e., a nitrous oxide molecule is equivalent to 300 molecules of CO2 in its thermal effects) and remains for more than a century in the atmosphere before being naturally degraded by solar radiation. But as human activities are emitting it much faster than it’s destroyed, it has been accumulating dangerously for decades. Despite global efforts to reduce industrial emissions of this gas, several emerging economies are rapidly increasing their emissions by other means — notably Brazil, China and India, where agricultural production and livestock farming have increased very quickly since the end of the last century.  

The enormous danger that lurks in these facts is the increasing likelihood that measures taken to reduce global carbon dioxide emissions, which is the threat most constantly being talked about, will be largely counterbalanced (or even neutralized in their practical effects) by the growing emissions of other greenhouse gases with a much higher effect, like methane, fluorinated gases and nitrous oxide. If we want to establish effective strategies to mitigate pollution, limit global warming and meet climate targets, we will need to develop efficient technologies that allow us to recover and recycle these other gases or help industry to degrade them into harmless substances.

But the prognosis is tricky: if not even global carbon dioxide emissions have stopped growing, is it to be expected that industry and agricultural activities will be more successful in limiting other greenhouse gases with more powerful effect but less public attention? Without huge financial incentives and strict regulation, we can only expect another failure. And given that all countries are sensitive to cost increases or loss of economic competitiveness, only comprehensive international initiatives can lead to the necessary transformations, provided that the extent and severity of this emergency is previously understood. Without this, the combined and cumulative effects of the various factors of climatic disturbance will soon expose us to unprecedented catastrophes – and much sooner than expected.

It is not too much to emphasize that many of the projections and scenarios that have been built on the evolution of climate change and its consequences suffer from various methodological limitations or understandable academic prudence. In some cases, only linear projections are made, that is, predictions based on the calculation of what will happen within a certain time if the current trend and pace of progression of the studied phenomena are maintained, a method that leaves out their increasing acceleration. In other cases, due to greater ease of analysis or scientific specialization, forecasts take only into account the isolated evolution of one or two variables of the process, leaving out the expected result of the combination of all known variables, that is, they stress the analytical rigor and neglect the systemic view. In some other cases, they neglect the influence of several poorly studied causes that may have a catalyzing effect on the natural processes that condition climate change. In short: in scientific works and in reports of many international institutions, it’s frequently underestimated or disregarded the increasing acceleration of climate change, the exponential nature of its effects, the catalytic action of certain combined occurrences and the aggravating circumstances that contribute (or may contribute) to trigger vicious cycles or "snowball effects". To some extent, this is normal: when singly studying the many ingredients of a mixture, it’s easy to lose sight of whether it is explosive. In this matter, however, we can no longer afford that luxury.

On climate issues, reality has surpassed the most pessimistic scenarios and shattered all optimism. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol and the 2015 Paris Agreement are now mere relics. From both we take advantage of the wealth of data collected so far and the international convergence of concerns, but not of the accuracy of forecasts or the effectiveness of commitments made then. Apart from the practical advances being scarce, no one predicted such an accelerated pace of climate change or the real evolution of the underlying causes. The apparent scientific consensus erred by default, academic and political prudence sinned by excess. That cannot happen again at the Glasgow Conference or others that will follow, or we’ll pay a very high price. If we do not want to pay it, we cannot postpone to 2050 the carbon neutrality target. For many countries or regions and for many hundreds of millions of people, it will be too late. But meanwhile no one will be immune to the consequences. Some of them are unpredictable, others will happen well ahead of schedule.

It should not be forgotten that, according to recent history to which we have become accustomed, today's pessimistic forecasts will be tomorrow’s outdated forecasts. We’ll certainly have a global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030 and we could reach 2°C by 2040, decades earlier than initially predicted. Summers are successively beating absolute temperature records since registers have been made and heat mantles happen now in completely unexpected regions. Aggravating the whole situation, forest fires of gigantic proportions in various parts of the world, even in northern latitudes, are further warming the atmosphere and releasing in it incalculable amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The frequency and intensity of these large fires tend to increase with each passing year. Ocean warming progresses at a steady pace and tends to accelerate too. The amount of icy surface across the planet has been decreasing in all seasons, which also reduces the reflection of sun rays and increases heat absorption. By putting these and other factors together, we have the perfect combination for sea levels to climb up.

Between 1900 and 2000, the average sea level rose 14 centimeters. In the first twenty years of the 21st century alone, it rose more than 7 centimeters. That is to say, the rate of ascent almost tripled. Was this foreseen? So much, no. It was anticipated that there would be some acceleration, but the actual rise in sea level is now almost double of what was calculated. At this rate, and without any acceleration of the phenomenon, we could certainly count on an additional rise of 10 cm until the mid of this century, which already foreshadows devastating consequences for many coastal areas. High tides will be more invasive, there will be greater ripple amplitudes (especially during storms) and coastal flooding will be more frequent and more destructive. But the biggest problem is that the phenomenon is accelerating fast and this acceleration is intensifying more and more, so much that it won’t be unreasonable to admit that such an increase may be reached within the next decade and that we’ll arrive to the mid of the century with an increase of almost half a meter compared to the average level at the beginning of the century. So being, once again well ahead of schedule. In the meantime, we're going to see a lot of coastal destruction, but that’s not all. More heat in the atmosphere and in oceans means much more evaporation and therefore much more severe precipitation phenomena than usual, such as large-scale torrential rains, huge and extensive snowfalls or big hailstorms, sometimes concentrating in a few hours or days what was previously spread over longer periods and, in some regions, even causing unprecedented extreme phenomena. In other words: the resulting destruction will not only hit the flank of archipelagos and continents, but will also come from above in colossal proportions, even in areas far away from coast and waterways.  

Sea level rise has never been so fast since there are records. Just the partial melting of Greenland's ice mantle, caused by the increase in local average temperatures in recent decades, accounted for about 25% of the rise in sea level globally. This background scenario was occasionally aggravated by the appearance of large masses of hot and humid air transported to the area, which have temporarily covered this huge island. There were times when the melting occurred at an average close to one million tons per minute, a value too high even for our imagination. And earlier this year, scientists warned that a significant portion of Greenland's ice was approaching a tipping point at which thaw would become inevitable. The observation of weather conditions in the region leaves no room for doubt that this is a real risk. In July 2021, in just one day, enough ice melted in Greenland to cover an area equivalent to the state of Florida with two inches of water. The following month, with temperatures above freezing and, in some places, 18ºC higher than average, it rained for several hours on the summit of Greenland's polar ice cap, something that had never happened before and led to melting snow and ice along an extensive area about four times the size of the UK. These phenomena are not fortuitous and are undoubtedly linked to the various causes of global warming, in particular greenhouse gas emissions. If ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica continue to melt at the increasing pace of recent years, sea levels are estimated to reach in the coming decades a level that was previously only expected by the end of the century. No country will be prepared to face the possible consequences, and unfortunately it can be said that almost none are preparing for them. Widespread improvidence, as with the most recent pandemic, can only magnify the calamities that will occur.

It’s also important to point out that, as with rising temperatures, this progressive rise in average sea and ocean levels is not evenly distributed. Believing so is another common mistake. The large water masses on the planet are not static and, by the action of tides, winds and currents, they fustigate certain coasts more than others, which means that some coastal areas will suffer the impact corresponding to a higher-than-average rise. Also zones with lower slope and fewer natural or artificial barriers will tend to be more deeply affected and will face a greater destructive potential.

But the biggest risk factor remains the relative unpredictability of the worst-case scenarios in the short and medium term. Sudden and unexpected causes may precipitate events far beyond the pessimism considered acceptable, generating disastrous effects, not for generations to come, but for today's humanity.

This means that even today’s elderly are not free from witnessing disasters they never imagined or from suffering their eventual consequences, be they direct or indirect. Immediate future is no less filled with uncertainty than distant future. What is currently happening is not just a set of temporary incidents in an errant weather pattern. It’s a vast panoply of climatic symptoms that denounce the imminence of something on a large scale, something that may erupt in greater proportions almost from one moment to another (such as an extensive and rapid thaw, for example, on a scale incomparably higher than those recorded so far).

An analogy could be established with what often happens in volcanic eruptions: it can take decades or centuries to accumulate pressure inside a volcano before it explodes, there may even be prolonged omens of what will happen, but the blast is usually abrupt and the consequences are largely irreversible. Contemporary science still knows too little about volcanism to even risk detailed predictions and this is a topic that rarely comes up linked to the issue of climate change. But there may be a relationship. The considerable increase of water level in oceans by the effect of successive melts not only represents a gigantic displacement and redistribution of mass on Earth's surface but also substantially alters the total weight supported by tectonic plates in their different zones. It’s simply unknown what effect this may have on volcanic activity and seismic phenomena in a short or medium term perspective. Ignorance itself makes us not talk much about it, to avoid pure speculation. But a little reasoning is enough to understand that an increase in volcanism and seismic activity is to be expected as a consequence of the vast and profound changes in the planet's surface. Regions that seemed geologically stabilized may soon cease to be so, with enormous repercussions on the nearest urbanised areas. Like the famous Hydra of Greek mythology, global warming increasingly appears to be a seven-headed monster, all equally threatening.

Is there still time to reverse something?

Let's be realistic. In the coming decades, the world will not curb its energy voracity, nor the desire for mobility, nor the consumption of meat, nor the eagerness for consumerism, nor the ambition for bigger and better houses. All economic activities generating large polluting emissions will be under the pressure of increasing demand for goods and services. There is no way to curb it globally, and much less in the majority of countries that have historically lived with lower standards of food, comfort, mobility and consumption, and now want to approach the standard of living of wealthy countries. Therefore, we must reconvert processes and products so that they generate less waste and less pollution. And that was necessary for yesterday. We're already late today. But perhaps it still remains for us a chance to carry out as soon as possible the inventory of indispensable advances to combat and reverse climate change and push governments and international organisations to get to work, supporting and funding whatever is needed and drastically changing their investment priorities – which to a large extent can only be achieved with extensive international cooperation, another usual big problem. Only this time it's not about strategy games on the board of geopolitics. For some countries, it’s all about survival; for many others, it’s about not losing territory and infrastructure; and for still others, it’s a matter of avoiding widespread chaos; but for vast portions of mankind, the greatest common threat may be the dramatic fall of our levels of civilization. We have conquered them, in many cases, against nature. Now we have to harmonize with her, whether we like it or not. And as soon as possible.

There can be no mere precautions of an economic or political nature to justify slackness and hesitations in what is indispensable to do. And it will be good to keep in mind that whatever the costs of a rapid and programmed reconversion of national economies and technological processes, the costs resulting from the destruction or economic paralysis caused by major natural disasters totally beyond our control and of unprecedented dimensions, whose contours and impact we can only suspect, will be for sure immeasurably higher. If little or nothing is done, human and material losses will surpass today's worst predictions and we will suffer, far earlier than anticipated, the heavy consequences of our collective negligence.

We don’t know which world we are going to leave to our descendants as a result of our generational selfishness, but the main issue is no longer that. Because from now on we don’t even know, in the near future, which world we are going to leave to ourselves. And if there has been a time of weighting and prudence, the data we have today require foresight and immediate action. We are in a race against time, which means there's not much time to lose. Never so much as today has been needed a concerted action by politicians, diplomats, scientists, entrepreneurs, teachers and media. And wherever exist leaders who are up to make the necessary changes, it's time for them to get out of the closet. We have reached a point where we cannot continue to ignore or devalue climate threats and all that they may entail, or an era of economic, social, political and civilizational setback awaits us. Enough of political rhetoric. We must act.