Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate

The IPCC Wraps Up — for Now

The UN panel will write its next round of reports against the backdrop of a world hitting its climate deadlines — and facing the consequences.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Our world is on the edge of a climate precipice, says a major new report from a panel of UN climate scientists, and the next decade will be crucial in deciding what its future will look like. But catastrophe is not inevitable, the scientists said, and the report laid out a path back from the edge.

“The climate time-bomb is ticking,” said UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, calling the report a “survival guide for humanity.”

This report, known as a “synthesis,” brings together the key findings of the work done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) over the last few years as part of its regular review of climate science and the state of the world’s efforts to address climate change. If climate science is over, this report is the endcap. The next round of IPCC reports won’t be published until around 2030, which means they’ll be written against the backdrop of a world hitting its climate deadlines — and facing the consequences.

Earth has warmed by 1.1 degrees Celsius since preindustrial times, a change the report says was “unequivocally caused” by human activities, primarily greenhouse gas emissions. That brings us perilously close to the crucial figure of 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, the target agreed to in the 2015 Paris Agreement that is commonly considered the upper edge of acceptable warming before climate impacts become catastrophic.

Despite pledges to reduce emissions, carbon emissions have been increasing, the report says, and the impacts of climate change are already appearing faster and more intensely than previously predicted. But there is still time to change course, and every bit of progress will be crucial — the severity of climate impacts depends on fractions of degrees, and even if we blow through our 1.5 degree target, we should be doing our best to stop any additional warming.

“Almost irrespective of our choices in the near term, we will probably reach 1.5 degrees in the first half of the next decade,” said Peter Thorne, a lead author of the synthesis report, in a press conference on Monday. “The real question is whether our will to reduce emissions means we reach 1.5 degrees, maybe go a little bit over, but then come back down, or whether we go blasting through 1.5 degrees, go through even 2 degrees, and keep on going. So the future really is in our hands. That’s why the rest of this decade is key.”

The report doesn’t include any new solutions; we already know what needs to happen. To keep warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius, greenhouse gas emissions would need to peak in the next two years, and carbon dioxide emissions would have to be reduced by 65% by 2035, the report says — a new benchmark that illustrates just how drastic cuts to emissions would have to be to avert catastrophe.

But the report comes amidst a mixed backdrop. Last year President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act — which “stand[s] to turbocharge the transformation of the American energy system” — into law, and Europe has seen a major push in decarbonization, particularly in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In 2020, Chinese president Xi Jinping pledged his country’s carbon emissions would peak by 2030.

But that’s not the whole story. Major polluters, including the U.S. and China, are still approving new fossil fuel extraction projects that will doubtless contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions. Even though renewable energy generation surpassed coal in the U.S. last year, carbon emissions still rose by 1.3 percent — and new major drilling projects in Alaska haven’t even started yet.

Even the IPCC’s work itself has previously been delayed by fossil fuel interests — UN member states have to approve the language of the text, and last year the Saudi Arabian government successfully lobbied to delay the release of a report in order to tone down language that called for the phase-out of fossil fuels and inject an emphasis on unproven carbon-capture technologies. Negotiations for this year’s synthesis report, which was supposed to be approved on Friday, dragged into Sunday as countries quibbled over language.

In November, countries will gather in Dubai for the UN’s climate conference, where they will witness the conclusion of the first global stocktake, which assesses the world’s progress towards the goals set out in the Paris Agreement. Combined with the stocktake, the findings in the synthesis report will provide a firm scientific foundation for negotiations at the conference. What remains to be seen is whether the science can outweigh capital — last year, major oil producers blocked an effort to include language calling for a “phase-down” of all fossil fuels in the final agreement.

The IPCC was founded in 1988 to provide a comprehensive look at everything we knew about climate change and how it might impact our lives in the future; at the time, climate change was more of an abstraction than a lived reality, and the panel’s reports gave shape to that abstraction. The release of the synthesis is a sign that the IPCC’s work, for now, is done. In the press conference on Monday, the report’s authors stressed the urgency of action from governments, businesses, and individuals alike.

“We at all levels: governments, communities, individuals, have made climate change someone else’s problem,” said Thorne. “We have to stop that. We have to act now.”

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Trump Asked to Kill Wyoming Wind Projects for Eagles

Conservationists in Wyoming zero in on a vulnerability anti-wind activists are targeting elsewhere: the administration’s species protection efforts.

Eagles and wind turbines in Wyoming.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Wildlife conservationists in Wyoming are asking the Trump administration to block wind projects in their state in the name of protecting eagles from turbine blades.

The Albany County Conservancy, a Wyoming wildlife advocacy group, sent letters on February 11 and 18 to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Attorney General Pam Bondi. In the letters, which I obtained, the group asked the Trump officials to do everything in their power to halt Repsol’s Rail Tie and BluEarth’s Two Rivers wind projects, including suspending Two Rivers’ right-of-way from the Bureau of Land Management and even the interconnection grant for Rail Tie’s transmission line.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

A Hail Mary Kansas Lawsuit Against the IRA

And more of the week’s top conflicts around renewable energy.

A Hail Mary Kansas Lawsuit Against the IRA
  1. Jackson County, Kansas — We’ve been covering anti-renewable lawsuits in the Trump 2.0 era closely at The Fight. But we now have a champion for the most aggressive lawsuit yet: a case filed against a single solar project intended to somehow kill … the entire Inflation Reduction Act?
    1. Three Kansas residents have gotten the support of five seasoned attorneys — including two Federalist Society alums — to sue the federal government claiming that projects benefiting from IRA tax credits should have to be reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act, and that implementation of the IRA violated the Administrative Procedures Act.
    2. Their lawsuit, which was filed days before Trump took office, cites a single NextEra project in Kansas to make its claims of tangible damages.
    3. We asked the attorneys to comment on the lawsuit, as we’re wondering if this is an opening salvo before a broader legal effort to challenge IRA implementation.
    4. It’s worth saying this is obviously a huge ask of the administration, even in the Trump era. Not to mention it’s unclear how this legal complaint will fare with Trump’s decision to knock down NEPA implementing regulations (more on that in our Policy Watch section). But at a minimum, this is a noteworthy and novel attempt at what some may argue is a nuisance lawsuit — and indicates how conservative legal experts are finding common cause with disgruntled neighbors of renewables projects.
  2. St. James Parish, Louisiana — A state judge ruled this week that St. James Parish lawfully rejected what is believed to be one of the state’s largest solar projects.
    1. The Parish Council last year denied D.E. Shaw Renewables’ St. James Solar Energy Center which was supposed to connect to an Entergy substation as part of that utility’s solar and wind project pipeline.
    2. The rejection however came after years of local resistance to the project. D.E. Shaw took them to court after the most recent denial. But now they’ve lost, with a state judge ruling this week that they’ve failed to prove the council had good reason to say no.
    3. It’s a potential bad omen for Entergy’s efforts to complete the largest renewables expansion in state history.
  3. Alaska — We’ve never talked about Alaska here at The Fight but it’s time to do so, because renewables projects are having trouble up North.
    1. Renewable IPP is pulling the plug on a large solar project in Nikiski, a village southwest of Anchorage, citing uncertainty around federal funding and tax credits.
    2. The remote city of Kotzebue is trying to develop wind turbines to move its grid off of fossil fuels. But its money is tied up in the Trump funding freeze.
    3. Why am I watching this so closely? Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy is quietly pro renewables. Its broader effort to use “all of the above” to market his state’s relevance in energy markets and its minerals tied to the energy transition.

Here’s what else I’m watching …

In Massachusetts, anti-wind activist Mary Chalke is running for a seat on the select board for the town of Nantucket. She’s well known for wearing a whale costume to protests.

Keep reading...Show less
Policy Watch

What Trump’s NEPA Wrecking Ball Means for Renewables

And more of the week’s top policy news.

Environmental review, mapped.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. New NEPA world – The Trump White House overnight effectively rescinded all implementing rules for the National Environmental Policy Act, a key statute long relied on by regulators for permitting large energy and infrastructure projects.

  • What does this mean for renewables developers? Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles told me today that even though fewer regulations sounds nice, Trump’s implementation strategy is unlikely to ease minds on renewables permits.
  • A big reason is confusion. Litigation that anti-renewables advocates filed against Biden’s permits will be considered under the previous NEPA regulations, while Boyles expects regulators to use a new attempt at NEPA implementation in an uneven way that privileges fossil fuels projects.
  • An example is “cumulative impacts,” a term historically used by agencies to look at comprehensive environmental impacts under NEPA. Previous challenges to the cumulative impacts of renewables projects will continue; meanwhile, the new Trump memo scrapped the definition of the term and dissuaded agencies from using it. What Boyles told me is this will simply put more discretion at the hands of political officials in permitting agencies.
  • “When you get rid of the definition, you’re going to still have a fight,” she said. “You now no longer have that common basis of understanding of what is a definition.”
  • When I first asked Boyles to tell me what comes next, she started hysterically laughing: “I’m not laughing because it’s a bad question. I think it’s a question that everybody’s asking.”
  • Heatmap’s Katie Brigham has a deeper dive on the Trump rule withdrawal here.

2. Our hydrogen hero – Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Shelley Moore Capito this week came out against any freeze for a hydrogen hub with projects in her state, indicating that any clampdown on H2 projects from the federal level may get Republican pushback.

Keep reading...Show less