Collapse

We are on the brink of an irreversible climate disaster. This is a global emergency beyond any doubt. Much of the very fabric of life on Earth is imperiled. We are stepping into a critical and unpredictable new phase of the climate crisis. For many years, scientists, including a group of more than 15,000, have sounded the alarm about the impending dangers of climate change driven by increasing greenhouse gas emissions and ecosystem change (Ripple et al. 2020). For half a century, global warming has been correctly predicted even before it was observed—and not only by independent academic scientists but also by fossil fuel companies (Supran et al. 2023). Despite these warnings, we are still moving in the wrong direction; fossil fuel emissions have increased to an all-time high, the 3 hottest days ever occurred in July of 2024 (Guterres 2024), and current policies have us on track for approximately 2.7 degrees Celsius (°C) peak warming by 2100 (UNEP 2023). Tragically, we are failing to avoid serious impacts, and we can now only hope to limit the extent of the damage. We are witnessing the grim reality of the forecasts as climate impacts escalate, bringing forth scenes of unprecedented disasters around the world and human and nonhuman suffering. We find ourselves amid an abrupt climate upheaval, a dire situation never before encountered in the annals of human existence. We have now brought the planet into climatic conditions never witnessed by us or our prehistoric relatives within our genus, Homo (supplemental figure S1; CenCO2PIP Consortium et al. 2023).

Abstract

Recent reports from climate scientists stress the urgency to implement more ambitious and stringent climate policies to stay below the 1.5 °C Paris Agreement target. These policies should simultaneously aim to ensure distributional justice throughout the process. A neglected yet potentially effective policy instrument in this context is rationing. However, the political feasibility of rationing, like any climate policy instrument, hinges to a large extent on the general public being sufficiently motivated to accept it. This study reports the first cross-country analysis of the public acceptability of rationing as a climate policy instrument by surveying 8654 individuals across five countries—Brazil, Germany, India, South Africa, and the US—on five continents. By comparing the public acceptability of rationing fossil fuels and high climate-impact foods with consumption taxes on these goods, the results reveal that the acceptability of fossil fuel rationing is on par with that of taxation, while food taxation is preferred over rationing across the countries. Respondents in low-and middle-income countries and those expressing a greater concern for climate change express the most favourable attitudes to rationing. As political leaders keep struggling to formulate effective and fair climate policies, these findings encourage a serious political and scientific dialogue about rationing as a means to address climate change and other sustainability-related challenges.

Related:

• Globally representative evidence on the actual and perceived support for climate action
• Improving public support for climate action through multilateralism

Abstract

The Antarctic Peninsula has experienced considerable anthropogenic warming in recent decades. While cryospheric responses are well defined, the responses of moss-dominated terrestrial ecosystems have not been quantified. Analysis of Landsat archives (1986–2021) using a Google Earth Engine cloud-processing workflow suggest widespread greening across the Antarctic Peninsula. The area of likely vegetation cover increased from 0.863 km2 in 1986 to 11.947 km2 in 2021, with an accelerated rate of change in recent years (2016–2021: 0.424 km2 yr−1) relative to the study period (1986–2021: 0.317 km2 yr−1). This trend echoes a wider pattern of greening in cold-climate ecosystems in response to recent warming, suggesting future widespread changes in the Antarctic Peninsula’s terrestrial ecosystems and their long-term functioning.

Abstract

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the United States have risen dramatically since the LNG-export ban was lifted in 2016, and the United States is now the world's largest exporter. This LNG is produced largely from shale gas. Production of shale gas, as well as liquefaction to make LNG and LNG transport by tanker, is energy-intensive, which contributes significantly to the LNG greenhouse gas footprint. The production and transport of shale gas emits a substantial amount of methane as well, and liquefaction and tanker transport of LNG can further increase methane emissions. Consequently, carbon dioxide (CO2) from end-use combustion of LNG contributes only 34% of the total LNG greenhouse gas footprint, when CO2 and methane are compared over 20 years global warming potential (GWP20) following emission. Upstream and midstream methane emissions are the largest contributors to the LNG footprint (38% of total LNG emissions, based on GWP20). Adding CO2 emissions from the energy used to produce LNG, total upstream and midstream emissions make up on average 47% of the total greenhouse gas footprint of LNG. Other significant emissions are the liquefaction process (8.8% of the total, on average, using GWP20) and tanker transport (5.5% of the total, on average, using GWP20). Emissions from tankers vary from 3.9% to 8.1% depending upon the type of tanker. Surprisingly, the most modern tankers propelled by two- and four-stroke engines have higher total greenhouse gas emissions than steam-powered tankers, despite their greater fuel efficiency and lower CO2 emissions, due to methane slippage in their exhaust. Overall, the greenhouse gas footprint for LNG as a fuel source is 33% greater than that for coal when analyzed using GWP20 (160 g CO2-equivalent/MJ vs. 120 g CO2-equivalent/MJ). Even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission (GWP100), which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal.

Abstract

Methane from livestock is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. Under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Annex I countries' National Inventories report emissions from cattle as enteric or from manure management at ratios of between 3:1 and 9:1 depending on country and cattle type. Field research generally supports the inventories' assumptions about enteric emissions, but these ratios have focused interest on enteric emissions and diverted attention away from those from manure management. Official calculations about manure management emissions factors are more varied than those for enteric emissions and evidence from field measurements suggests inventories may be underestimating manure management emissions especially in the dairy sector. This paper has three objectives. First, it reviews the science underpinning the international framework for estimating methane emissions from manure management. Second, it presents data from two dairy farms in south-west England where measured emissions of methane from slurry storage facilities are found to be four to five times greater than the assumptions in the UK's inventory. If these measurements were representative of the UK, the implication is that total methane emissions from the UK dairy herd would be over 40% greater than the level reported to the UNFCCC and the proportion of total methane emissions from dairy cows arising from manure management would be almost a half rather than less than a quarter. Finally, the paper assesses the potential value if methane were captured from slurry storage facilities. Its value as a biogas is estimated to be £500 million per year for the UK dairy industry (at forecourt diesel prices). The paper concludes that the scale of emissions and the potential economic value of lost biogas are sufficient to warrant urgent research and action to reduce emissions from manure management with the beneficial prospect that a valuable new income stream for farm businesses could also be realised.

Abstract

Anthropogenic activities have impacted marine ecosystems at extraordinary scales. Biogenic reef ecosystems built by the European flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) typically declined before scientific monitoring. The past form and extent of these habitats thus remains unknown, with such information potentially providing valuable perspectives for current management and policy. Collating >1,600 records published over 350 years, we created a map of historical oyster reef presence at the resolution of 10 km2 across its biogeographic range, including documenting abundant reef habitats along the coasts of France, Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Spatial extent data were available from just 26% of locations yet totalled >1.7 million hectares (median reef size = 29.9 ha, range 0.01–1,536,000 ha), with 190 associated macrofauna species from 13 phyla described. Our analysis demonstrates that oyster reefs were once a dominant three-dimensional feature of European coastlines, with their loss pointing to a fundamental restructuring and ‘flattening’ of coastal and shallow-shelf seafloors. This unique empirical record demonstrates the highly degraded nature of European seas and provides key baseline context for international restoration commitments.

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/13929793

"This should be the final nail in the coffin for the false narrative that LNG was somehow a climate solution”

Abstract

The Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) meltwater runoff has increased considerably since the 1990s, leading to implications for the ice sheet mass balance and ecosystem dynamics in ice-free areas. Extreme weather events will likely continue to occur in the coming decades. Therefore, a more thorough understanding of the spatiotemporal patterns of extreme melting events is of interest. This study aims to analyze the evolution of extreme melting events across the GrIS and determine the climatic factors that drive them. Specifically, we have analyzed extreme melting events (90th percentile) across the GrIS from 1950 to 2022 and examined their links to the surface energy balance (SEB) and large-scale atmospheric circulation. Extreme melting days account for approximately 35%–40% of the total accumulated melting per season. We found that extreme melting frequency, intensity, and contribution to the total accumulated June–August (summer) melting show a statistically significant upward trend at a 95% confidence level. The largest trends are detected across the northern GrIS. The trends are independent of the extreme melting percentile rank (90th, 97th, or 99th) analyzed and are consistent with average melting trends that exhibit an increase in similar magnitude and spatial configuration. Radiation plays a dominant role in controlling the SEB during extreme melting days. The increase in extreme melting frequency and intensity is driven by the increase in anticyclonic weather types during summer and more energy available for melting. Our results help to enhance the understanding of extreme events in the Arctic.

Humanity’s rapacious consumption is more than Earth and its climate can handle, which is driving an ecological crisis.