Today, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) released its 10th Emissions Gap Report, ahead of next week’s annual Conference of the Parties in Madrid (COP25). This blog will take an interlude from exploring natural climate solutions to digest the relevance of the findings for nature. The report highlights the gap between countries current commitments to tackle climate change, versus where we need to be to keep warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius. It acknowledges a collective failure to act early and quickly enough, which means faster and more expensive transformation is urgent.
What is at stake?
In 2018, The World Resources Institute produced an analysis of the difference in impacts on nature likely to occur between 1.5 - 2 degrees of warming (Figure 1). The difference in impacts is bleak, but the most staggering is the effect on corals. At two degrees of warming, the world is likely to lose almost all of its coral reefs. Corals are home to a quarter of the earth’s marine species and act as nurseries for the majority of the world’s fish and crustaceans. Furthermore, corals are worth £65 billion a year to the global economy. Around 500 million people rely on corals for their livelihoods: foods, fishing and tourism, among them.
Corals are just one example of an ecosystem at risk. Life on every continent and in every ocean is under threat from global warming, with more devastating consequences occurring in more vulnerable regions.
Figure 1 - differences in 1.5 and 2 degrees Celcius of warming. Image segment source: World Resources Institute
What role does nature have to play?
Although nature is at risk, it also has a significant role to play in closing the commitment gap to remain below 1.5 degrees Celcius. Beyond a doubt, the energy sector has the most extensive role to play in terms of transformation to avoid dangerous climate change. However, natural climate solutions are vital for the transition - particularly forests.
The report summarises that G20 countries are the leading culprits in terms of this year's greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 2).
Figure 2 - G20 countries are responsible for 78% of all emissions, with China, USA, the EU28 and India responsible for 55% - this does not include land-use change emissions; if it did, Brazil is likely to be the world’s largest emitter. Taken from UNEP
Countries, states, business and financial institutions urgently need to take action and implement the commitments they have made to reduce or reach zero-deforestation. Including commitments made under:
Beyond halting deforestation in the land-use sector, an agricultural revolution is integral. Sustainable agriculture, reforesting and restoring degraded areas to full carbon storage capacity is paramount. This will allow countries to build net negative emissions.
Curiously, as guidance for forest restoration, UNEP has cited Bastin et al.’s research in the report. This research maps potential future afforestation and carbon sequestration. However, since release, the research has not been short of critics. According to Veldman et al., the study overestimates the soil carbon sequestration ability of young forests. Furthermore, researchers at the University of Bonn found that reforestation was mapped in areas where tree planting would not be viable. For example, afforesting permafrost in Northern Russia and across Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where 11.8 million people live.
Considerations for COP
Bastin et al.’s study may not be the holy grail of guidance for countries looking to strengthen the natural component of their nationally determined contributions. However, the message of the paper and its critics is united – the restoration of nature is the strongest, cheapest and quickest climate mitigation solution available for carbon capture and storage. It is a solution available to every country on the planet. This message is of the utmost importance for governments to remember as they head into next week’s negotiations. Fossil fuels must remain underground – while nature regenerates overground.
Comments