Could a climate emergency mobilisation ‘stop’ climate change? 

Could a climate emergency mobilization ‘stop’ climate change? First to clarify terminology:

• This is the ‘technical and economic question’ of is it possible? It is separate from the ‘will we’ question, which is the political and social question of whether we will decide to do so. We will return to the latter later. 

• What it precisely means to ‘stop’ climate change is debatable and unknowable today. We however use it as a short cut to saying what is required to make the climate sufficiently safe to avoid catastrophe and for humanity to continue to develop as a civilisation. 

While the science will evolve further, a reasonable assessment based on today’s science it that stabilising temperatures in the range of 1 – 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels is likely to be relatively ‘safe’ [FN1].

If that is correct, can we stop climate change?  The comments here refer to ‘on the balance of probabilities, is there a reasonable likelihood?’.

The great benefit of 30 years of talking about climate change solutions, is that the problem and solutions have been extensively studied by top experts from many perspectives. We know how to cut emissions and stabilise temperatures. We have plans and analysis far more advanced for example than the UK or the USA had heading into WWII. The  One Degree War Plan, co-written by Paul Gilding and Professor Jorgen Randers in 2008, showed at a high level what types of practical actions would be required to achieve success. There are now a number of such plans like “The Victory Plan” applying to the USA produced by The Climate Mobilization. There are also numerous studies on the viability and economic benefits of relatively rapid transitions to a 100% renewable energy system. These are all comparable to WWII in the sense of requiring dramatic and strong intervention by the state to direct the market. 

We also have, perhaps more importantly, huge advances in the real-world market roll out of those technologies which a Climate Emergency mobilisation would need to urgently take to scale to achieve the emission reductions required. This refers not just to the new market competitiveness of renewable energy, electric cars and batteries but their synergistic impacts with other technologies like the Internet of Things (IOT), Artificial Intelligence (AI) and many others. These synergies will drive transformational developments like autonomous vehicles for personal transport and freight, personalised energy trading and smart grids.  The challenge of taking existing and rapidly emerging market solutions to scale is far less than developing new ones, as had to occur in WWII. 

We will still need detailed, science-based action plans to transform to a zero net, then negative CO2 economy within a decade or two. But based on the type of studies referred to above, we can be confident it can be done. It will be very disruptive and require significant government intervention and public mobilisation - commensurate to WWII but at global scale. It will also mean eliminating whole industries. Which is why those industries have naturally been arguing that it’s not possible for society to change that fast. 

But consider the evidence of today’s market – particularly the incredible global disruption being caused in energy markets and transport. Then combine that with the historical evidence of other major economic and social transformations like WWII, the rapid growth in China and the transformation of numerous Asian economies. 

Together these suggest we can indeed move very quickly when we choose to and can achieve extraordinary levels of economic and social change in 5-10 year periods. 

Given all the above, there appears to be no technical or economic impediment to successfully stopping climate change, just political and attitudinal ones.

Footnotes

[FN1] A safe climate is defined as action to re-instate natural climate processes that generate global average temperatures and ocean acidity that are safe for all species and for civilisation. (ie. preindustrial temperatures & acidity). Concern from a number of sources suggest that limiting and stabalising temperatures to and increase of 1.5 degrees C, is not sufficient to provide a safe environment for all species and for civilsation. See https://www.breakthroughonline.org.au/home1