In a study related to reducing global carbon emissions and controlling rising temperatures, scientists have explained why global warming would be less than 1.7 ° C is not rational.
Global Warming – Symbolic Picture
Global Warming Study: If you study the scientific reports, you will find countless scenarios that can lead us to reduce the global carbon emissions by 2050 and we can achieve the target of reducing the temperature by 1.5 degree Celsius. This means that ‘it is still possible, provided we have the political will.’ But what will be our political will, and more importantly, what will be the deeper social practices that drive it?
Christopher Heidmann of the University of Hamburg, Eduardo Griez of the University of Hamburg and Jan Petzold of the University of Hamburg have studied social means to significantly reduce the amount of carbon emissions (Global Warming Background of Study). They say that is it not only possible, but also logical, that we can reach the goal of cutting carbon emissions by 2050 by a large amount and achieve the target of 1.5 degree Celsius reduction in temperature? These are some of the questions we have asked ourselves in the recent Hamburg Climate Futures Outlook.
New approach to study
It is a report compiled by over 40 scholars from various disciplines including sociology, macroeconomics and natural sciences. We have taken a new approach to the study of the climate future, a stance that goes beyond previous efforts by the IPCC (Inter-Governmental Committee on Climate Change), the International Energy Agency and others, which have only projected a ‘probable’ and viable future was. Here the word ‘probable’ refers to being in conformity with natural laws, while ‘feasible’ means that there are no or few constraints towards a particular future.
Examples given in the study
For example, it is technically and economically feasible (obviously possible) to sell your car and buy a bike. The technology of the bike is mature and it is cheaper than car maintenance (Global Warming Awareness Study). But would you do this? It is also feasible that 20 percent of the UK population will be vegetarian by next year. But will they do this? On the other hand, the word ‘rational’ here implies that some things are far more likely to happen than others. It has a strong probability.
Created a picture of existing research
In the context of a climate future, it refers to a scenario that is not only viable, but also has enough social behavior and political will to realize that future (Antarctica Global Warming Study). They say, in our study, we first created a picture of existing research describing the measures needed to achieve the goal of major carbon reductions by 2050. Negative emissions technologies such as BECCS (burning biofuels for energy and storing the carbon dioxide it produces) can help, but these technologies may not be a complete solution to the problem.
need to act fast
To achieve the goal of reducing carbon to a large extent, we must first reduce the pollutants generated by human activities. We will need to cut emissions year after year from now to 2050, which is close to the 7 percent reduction caused by the lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic (Antarctica Global Warming Study). Since the adoption of zero carbon emission technology may take decades, we need to act fast on it.
Some countries showed positive effects
To study the social behavior needed for such rapid change, we looked at 10 social means of cutting carbon: UN climate governance, cross-border efforts, climate regulations, climate change protests and social movements, Climate debate, corporate responses, switching from fossil fuels to other sources of energy, consumption patterns, journalism and knowledge creation. We found that social movements have made a positive impact in some countries, but it remains uncertain how their political vision will mature in the aftermath of the pandemic or in countries such as China, where demonstrations usually do not affect national politics. is.
Why not rationalize warming reduction?
We combined our assessment of social rationality with the latest physical science research on future socioeconomic emissions scenarios and climate sensitivity to determine how warm the climate would be after emitting a specified amount of CO2 (Global Warming Awareness Study). This combined physical and social assessment put warming below 1.7 °C and more than 4.9 °C by the end of the century because it is not yet rational.
Is the game over?
Large reductions in carbon emissions may be more rational, but will require far more concrete steps. We not only have to make big changes, but we also have to make those changes a tangible one. Although the goal of reducing the temperature by 1.5 °C may be possible, there is no basis to show any glimmer of hope for the achievement of this goal, but perhaps our findings will give impetus to realize it.
Also read- Foreign Minister furious after being in ‘Grey List’, Qureshi said – some people want the sword of FATF hanging on Pakistan
Also read- US-Pakistan: Pakistan has paid a big price because of America, now wants ‘equal’ relationship like India: Imran Khan
.