气候领导力的集结号

Sep 10, 2018 Christiana Figueres , May Boeve

发自伦敦——从年初至今，极端天气在我们这个星球上四处肆虐，将世界各地的脆弱社区置于不断增加的气候变化影响之下。随着时间的推移，我们会越来越多地了解——并亲身体验到——采集和燃烧化石燃料的危险后果。洪水，干旱和山火将会造成更多伤亡，天气的行为模式也更加严酷。

今年晚些时候，政府间气候变化专门委员会（Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change，也是联合国关于该主题的科学工作组）将会提交其运作四年以来的第一份重要报告。该报告会详细列出如果我们不将全球平均温度保持相对在工业化前水平的1.5°C以内的破坏性后果。尽管各个政府和行业都分别做出了承诺，但我们已经冲破了1°C这条线，也见识到了极大的破坏性影响。我们需要立即做出改变。

幸运的是，立即采取行动减少温室气体排放可以带来直接效益。例如当加利福尼亚州的八座燃煤和燃油发电厂在2001~2011年期间相继关闭之后，居住在这些电厂附近的女性生育率都在关闭一年内有所提升。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

Christiana Figueres

Writing for PS since 2015
11 Commentaries

Christiana Figueres, a founding partner of Global Optimism, is a co-author of the bestselling book The Future We Choose: The Stubborn Optimist’s Guide to the Climate Crisis, and a co-presenter of the Outrage + Optimism podcast. She was executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change from 2010-16, overseeing the landmark Paris agreement on climate change, adopted by 190 countries and the European Union.

May Boeve

Writing for PS since 2018
2 Commentaries

May Boeve is Executive Director of 350.org.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 3 Comments on this article

Jose Antonio Vanderhorst Silverio Sep 10, 2018

If we were still under the Industrial Civilization to restore institutions of The Wealth of Nations where economic knowledge was clear cut, "The Masses Are Mobilizing for Climate Leadership" has precedents that it would be the best unique alternative.

However, here is a complementary unprecedented alternative, for whether or not having already overshot the global carrying capacity of the Industrial Civilization in a variety of key areas, including GHGs [greenhouse gases], nitrogen, phosphorus, fresh water, and use, and biodiversity. The reason to trust the alternative beyond scientific number is that systemic delays are so long that instead to continue “Wasting the crisis” we must start as soon as possible “Grasping the opportunities” to create institutional innovations of the #SystemicCivilization under #TheWealthOfGlobalization.

The above is one of the arguments that supports the Medium story "Get a friend to RT & Like an #MCGA Secular Stagnation Generative Dialogue." which is available in my personal Project Syndicate website temporarily, in order to get the support, for example, the example of the economists writing here in Project Syndicate. This complementary alternative approach would benefit greatly from the masses that "Are Mobilizing for Climate Leadership."
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Sep 10, 2018

The "masses" are going to stop China from mining and burning coal? Really? What color is your sun? The "masses" are going stop India from following China?

At some (very important) level, the entire global warming debate is an exercise in futility. Developing countries now account for most CO2 emissions (63% as of 2015) and all of the growth. Of course, they are not about to restrict fossil fuel use (at least at this time). In other words, there is nothing the U.S. or Europe can do to control global CO2 output.

A few useful (but generally unknown) statistics. China now produces twice as much CO2 as the U.S. Of course, it is sometimes argued that the U.S. and Europe have been emitting CO2 for a long time and it is (therefore) unfair to focus on developing countries. That’s not an entirely bad argument. However, China has produced more CO2 in the last few decades than Europe has since the start of the Industrial Revolution.

Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Accord. The Paris Accord imposed no substantive controls on developing countries Indeed, it generally ratified existing plans for massive increases in CO2 output from developing countries. Bjørn Lomborg estimated that the Paris Accord would reduce global temperatures by 0.05 C in 2100. An MIT study came up with 0.2 C in 2100. Other studies have claimed higher numbers for the Paris agreement. However, they assume additional post-Paris restrictions on CO2 output.

The bottom line is that Christiana Figueres and May Boeve simply aren't addressing the reality/realities at hand.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Sep 10, 2018

The coal plants are already built, the gas guzzling cars are on the roads, the republicans are in power. I think this could be a bigger problem than we imagine.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.