Ian Dunlop (ehemaliges Vorstandsmitglied der Australian Coal Association und Shell und nun Vorstandsmitglied des Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration) hat zusammen mit David Spratt (Wissenschaftlicher Direktor des Beratungsunternehmens Breakthrough) einen extrem düsteren Bericht geschrieben, der nichts weniger als den Zusammenbruch der globalen Zivilisation bis 2050 beschreibt.
Das Vorwort des Berichts stammt vom ehemaligen Chef des australischen Militärs Admiral Chris Barrie, der den Report als die „ungeschminkte Wahrheit über die verzweifelte Lage der Menschheit und des Planeten“ beschreibt, und der ein „verstörendes Bild der realen Möglichkeit beschreibt, dass menschliches Leben auf der Erde auf dem Weg in den Untergang“ sei, „in the most horrible way“. Weiter: „Die Implikationen [die dieser Bericht beschreibt] übertreffen bisherige konventionelle geopolitische Bedrohungen bei weitem“.
Nochmal: Diese Worte stammen nicht von irgendwelchen Treehuggern, sondern von einem australischen Admiral. Wahrscheinlich hören Konservative australischen Militärs eher zu, als linken Aktivisten, weshalb ich deren Engagement ausnahmsweise besonders begrüße. Vielleicht landen solche Berichte auch irgendwann auf dem Tisch der Wirtschaftspolitiker der CDU, damit sie endlich ihren verdammten Job machen.
Hier das Paper: Existential Climate-Related Security Risk: „Understanding climate-driven security risks relies on climate impact projections, but much knowledge produced for policymakers is too conservative. Because the risks are now existential, a new approach to climate and security risk assessment is required using scenario analysis.“
Der Bericht beschreibt in seiner apokalyptischen Untergangsvision zwar ein Szenario, das ungebremsten CO₂-Ausstoß vorsieht, aber mit Profis wie Lindner oder den Wirtschaftsauskennern der CDU sind wir auf dem besten Wege genau dort hin: New Report Suggests ‘High Likelihood of Human Civilization Coming to an End’ in 2050.
Die Handlungsempfehlungen des Berichts an die Politik liest sich konsequenterweise wie eine Rede von Greta Thunberg:
● Recognise the limitations of policy-relevant climate change research which may exhibit scientific reticence.
● Adopt a scenario approach giving specific attention to high-end warming possibilities in understanding medium-range (mid-century) climate and security risks, particularly because of the existential implications.
● Give analytical focus to the role of near-term action as a determinant in preventing planetary and human systems reaching a “point of no return” by mid-century, in which the prospect of a largely uninhabitable Earth leads to the breakdown of nations and the international order.
● Urgently examine the role that the national security sector can play in providing leadership and capacity for a near-term, society-wide, emergency mobilisation of labour and resources, of a scale unprecedented in peacetime, to build a zero-emissions industrial system and draw down carbon to protect human civilisation.
Hier noch ein Guardian-Artikel von Dunlop und Spratt dazu: We must mobilise for the climate emergency like we do in wartime. Where is the climate minister?
Hier das vollständige 2050-Szenario aus dem Bericht:
A 2050 SCENARIO
2020–2030: Policy-makers fail to act on evidence that the current Paris Agreement path — in which global human-caused greenhouse emissions do not peak until 2030 — will lock in at least 3°C of warming. The case for a global, climate-emergency mobilisation of labour and resources to build a zero-emission economy and carbon drawdown in order to have a realistic chance of keeping warming well below 2°C is politely ignored. As projected by Xu and Ramanathan, by 2030 carbon dioxide levels have reached 437 parts per million — which is unprecedented in the last 20 million years — and warming reaches 1.6°C.
2030–2050: Emissions peak in 2030, and start to fall consistent with an 80 percent reduction in fossil-fuel energy intensity by 2100 compared to 2010 energy intensity. This leads to warming of 2.4°C by 2050, consistent with the Xu and Ramanathan “baseline-fast” scenario. However, another 0.6°C of warming occurs — taking the total to 3°C by 2050 — due to the activation of a number of carbon-cycle feedbacks and higher levels of ice albedo and cloud feedbacks than current models assume.
[It should be noted that this is far from an extreme scenario: the low-probability, high-impact warming (five percent probability) can exceed 3.5–4°C by 2050 in the Xu and Ramanathan scheme.]
2050: By 2050, there is broad scientific acceptance that system tipping-points for the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and a sea-ice-free Arctic summer were passed well before 1.5°C of warming, for the Greenland Ice Sheet well before 2°C, and for widespread permafrost loss and large-scale Amazon drought and dieback by 2.5°C. The “hothouse Earth” scenario has been realised, and Earth is headed for another degree or more of warming, especially since human greenhouse emissions are still significant.
While sea levels have risen 0.5 metres by 2050, the increase may be 2–3 metres by 2100, and it is understood from historical analogues that seas may eventually rise by more than 25 metres.
Thirty-five percent of the global land area, and 55 percent of the global population, are subject to more than 20 days a year of lethal heat conditions, beyond the threshold of human survivability.
The destabilisation of the Jet Stream has very significantly affected the intensity and geographical distribution of the Asian and West African monsoons and, together with the further slowing of the Gulf Stream, is impinging on life support systems in Europe. North America suffers from devastating weather extremes including wildfires, heatwaves, drought and inundation. The summer monsoons in China have failed, and water flows into the great rivers of Asia are severely reduced by the loss of more than one-third of the Himalayan ice sheet. Glacial loss reaches 70 percent in the Andes, and rainfall in Mexico and central America falls by half. Semi-permanent El Nino conditions prevail.
Aridification emerges over more than 30 percent of the world’s land surface. Desertification is severe in southern Africa, the southern Mediterranean, west Asia, the Middle East, inland Australia and across the south-western United States.
Impacts: A number of ecosystems collapse, including coral reef systems, the Amazon rainforest and in the Arctic.
Some poorer nations and regions, which lack capacity to provide artificially-cooled environments for their populations, become unviable. Deadly heat conditions persist for more than 100 days per year in West Africa, tropical South America, the Middle East and South-East Asia, contributing to more than a billion people being displaced from the tropical zone. Water availability decreases sharply in the most affected regions at lower latitudes (dry tropics and subtropics), affecting about two billion people worldwide. Agriculture becomes nonviable in the dry subtropics.
Most regions in the world see a significant drop in food production and increasing numbers of extreme weather events, including heat waves, floods and storms. Food production is inadequate to feed the global population and food prices skyrocket, as a consequence of a one-fifth decline in crop yields, a decline in the nutrition content of food crops, a catastrophic decline in insect populations, desertification, monsoon failure and chronic water shortages, and conditions too hot for human habitation in significant food-growing regions.
The lower reaches of the agriculturally-important river deltas such as the Mekong, Ganges and Nile are inundated, and significant sectors of some of the world’s most populous cities — including Chennai, Mumbai, Jakarta, Guangzhou, Tianjin, Hong Kong, Ho Chi Minh City, Shanghai, Lagos, Bangkok and Manila — are abandoned. Some small islands become uninhabitable. Ten percent of Bangladesh is inundated, displacing 15 million people.
Even for 2°C of warming, more than a billion people may need to be relocated and In high-end scenarios, the scale of destruction is beyond our capacity to model, with a high likelihood of human civilisation coming to an end.
National security consequences: For pragmatic reasons associated with providing only a sketch of this scenario, we take the conclusion of the Age of Consequences ‘Severe’ 3°C scenario developed by a group of senior US national-security figures in 2007 as appropriate for our scenario too:
Massive nonlinear events in the global environment give rise to massive nonlinear societal events. In this scenario, nations around the world will be overwhelmed by the scale of change and pernicious challenges, such as pandemic disease. The internal cohesion of nations will be under great stress, including in the United States, both as a result of a dramatic rise in migration and changes in agricultural patterns and water availability. The flooding of coastal communities around the world, especially in the Netherlands, the United States, South Asia, and China, has the potential to challenge regional and even national identities.
Armed conflict between nations over resources, such as the Nile and its tributaries, is likely and nuclear war is possible. The social consequences range from increased religious fervor to outright chaos. In this scenario, climate change provokes a permanent shift in the relationship of humankind to nature’.
[Klimalinks 6.8.2019] Wer bezahlt Anpassungen an den Klimawandel?; Klimaaktivisten besetzen Tagebau Schleenhain; Energieberatung Wood Mackenzie sieht +3°C; in der Arktis brechen Eisplatten von Grönland ab