Economic Ecology

2021 ◽  
pp. 120-166
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Co2 Emission ◽  
Calculation Model ◽  
The State ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Fossil Energy ◽  
Global Heating ◽  
Pigovian Tax

The approach to economic ecology is based on a survey of the state of the ecosystem that departs from the state of global warming as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The state of alternatives to fossil energy is reviewed, too. Review of measures to establish a circular economy forms the base of a strategy for transition to carbon neutral economy. The most effective economic intervention towards global heating is identified as a Pigovian Tax on CO2-emission (ET). Evidence on the effectiveness and the state of implementation of ET 2020 is reviewed. For complementary evidence, the ET-calculation model of the Danish Climate Law 2020 is described by representatives of the Danish Climate Council in Appendix by Bendtsen and Stewart.

scholarly journals All change for climate change

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony R Walker
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New York ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Single Use

Governments, corporations and individuals all need to take immediate action to help change the global economy toward a circular economy. A circular economy which uses fewer resources and based on renewable clean technologies to help limit global warming to 1.5 °C. The 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report warned that limiting global warming to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels would require current greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions to be cut in half by 2030. Yet actions by governments, corporations and individuals are lagging behind. Many countries are failing their obligations made under the 2015 Paris climate agreement. Even the International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency set a 50% reduction target of GHG emissions for global shipping by 2050, but this falls short of the IPCC target by 20 years. The United Nations climate summit in New York this week (September 2019) needs to send a strong wake up call to the entire world for us all to change. Change makers like Greta Thunberg has already done that. Individual actions to change consumer behaviour can play a major role to help reduce GHG emissions. Even reducing use of single-use plastics (a petroleum derivative) and incineration can help reduce GHG emissions. GHG emissions from plastics could reach 15% of the global carbon budget by 2050 if not curbed. In Europe, plastic production and incineration emits an estimated ~400 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Therefore, reducing single-use plastic use could curb GHG emissions.

scholarly journals All change for climate change

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony R Walker
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New York ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Single Use

Governments, corporations and individuals all need to take immediate action to help change the global economy toward a circular economy. A circular economy which uses fewer resources and based on renewable clean technologies to help limit global warming to 1.5 °C. The 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report warned that limiting global warming to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels would require current greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions to be cut in half by 2030. Yet actions by governments, corporations and individuals are lagging behind. Many countries are failing their obligations made under the 2015 Paris climate agreement. Even the International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency set a 50% reduction target of GHG emissions for global shipping by 2050, but this falls short of the IPCC target by 20 years. The United Nations climate summit in New York this week (September 2019) needs to send a strong wake up call to the entire world for us all to change. Change makers like Greta Thunberg has already done that. Individual actions to change consumer behaviour can play a major role to help reduce GHG emissions. Even reducing use of single-use plastics (a petroleum derivative) and incineration can help reduce GHG emissions. GHG emissions from plastics could reach 15% of the global carbon budget by 2050 if not curbed. In Europe, plastic production and incineration emits an estimated ~400 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Therefore, reducing single-use plastic use could curb GHG emissions.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Scientific “Consensus” on Global Warming

1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Michaels ◽  
Paul C. Knappenberger
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Sulfate Aerosols ◽  
Climate Data ◽  
Consensus Process ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Extreme Scenario

Climate data support the “moderate” prediction of climate change (l-1.5°C) rather than the more extreme scenario (4°C or more). The moderate point of view was originally marginalized in the IPCC “consensus” process in both the 1990 First Assessment on Climate Change and in the 1992 Update prepared specifically for the Earth Summit and to provide backing for the Rio Framework Convention on Climate Change. It is now accepted, based on ground-based data, that the errors in those models are currently between 160% and 360%. If one compares them to the satellite data combined with the land record, the error rises to a maximum of 720%. In some recognition of this massive error, the 1995 IPCC “consensus” is that warming has been mitigated by sulfate aerosols. However, when that hypothesis is specifically tested, it fails. Further, data required to test the validity of the sulfate enhanced greenhouse models was withheld by the IPCC. despite repeated requests.

scholarly journals Community Adaptation Model of Food Security Due to Global Warming in Kulon Progo

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sri Rum Giyarsih
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Food Security ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Average Temperature ◽  
The Impact

Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface. According to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) average temperature of the Earth’s surface was global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the 0.74 ± 0.18 0C (1.33 ± 0.32 F) over the last hundred years. The impact of rising temperatures is the climate change effect on agricultural production. If the community does not craft made adaptation to global warming will have an impact on food security. This research aims to know the society’s adaptation to food security as a result of global warming and to know the influence of global warming on food security. The research was carried out based on survey methods. The influence of global warming on food security is identified with a share of household food expenditure and the identification of rainfall. Sampling was done by random sampling. The Data used are the primary and secondary data. Primary Data obtained through structured interviews and depth interview using a questionnaire while the secondary data retrieved from publication data of the Central Bureau Statistics B(BPS), Department of Agriculture and Climatology Meteorology and Geophysics (BMKG). The expected results of the study is to know variations of food security due to global warming in Kulon Progo Regency. Comprehensive knowledge through community participation and related Government increased food security that is used as the basis for drafting the model society’s adaptation to the impacts of global warming.

Introduction

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W. Orr
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Political Leader ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Assessment Report ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Media ◽  
Political Trauma ◽  
E Mail

In our final hour (2003), cambridge university astronomer Martin Rees concluded that the odds of global civilization surviving to the year 2100 are no better than one in two. His assessment of threats to humankind ranging from climate change to a collision of Earth with an asteroid received good reviews in the science press, but not a peep from any political leader and scant notice from the media. Compare that nonresponse to a hypothetical story reporting, say, that the president had had an affair. The blow-dried electronic pundits, along with politicians of all kinds, would have spared no effort to expose and analyze the situation down to parts per million. But Rees’s was only one of many credible and well-documented warnings from scientists going back decades, including the Fourth Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007). All were greeted with varying levels of denial, indifference, and misinterpretation, or were simply ignored altogether. It is said to be a crime to cause panic in a crowded theater by yelling “fire” without cause, but is it less criminal not to warn people when the theater is indeed burning? My starting point is the oddly tepid response by U.S. leaders at virtually all levels to global warming, more accurately described as “global destabilization.” I will be as optimistic as a careful reading of the evidence permits and assume that leaders will rouse themselves to act in time to stabilize and then reduce concentrations of greenhouse gases below the level at which we lose control of the climate altogether by the effects of what scientists call “positive carbon cycle feedbacks.” Even so, with a warming approaching or above 2°C we will not escape severe social, economic, and political trauma. In an e-mail to the author on November 19, 2007, ecologist and founder of the Woods Hole Research Center George Woodwell puts it this way: . . . There is an unfortunate fiction abroad that if we can hold the temperature rise to 2 or 3 degrees C we can accommodate the changes. The proposition is the worst of wishful thinking.

scholarly journals Global Warming: The Balance of Evidence and Its Policy Implications

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 357-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Keller
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Societal Implications ◽  
Temperature Record ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
New Information ◽  
Third Assessment Report ◽  
Made In

Global warming and attendant climate change have been controversial for at least a decade. This is largely because of its societal implications. With the recent publication of the Third Assessment Report of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change there has been renewed interest and controversy about how certain the scientific community is of its conclusions: that humans are influencing the climate and that global temperatures will continue to rise rapidly in this century. This review attempts to update what is known and in particular what advances have been made in the past 5 years or so. It does not attempt to be comprehensive. Rather it focuses on the most controversial issues, which are actually few in number. They are: 1-Is the surface temperature record accurate or is it biased by heat from cities, etc.? 2-Is that record significantly different from past warmings such as the Medieval Warming Period? 3-Is not the sun’s increasing activity the cause of most of the warming? 4-Can we model climate and predict its future, or is it just too complex and chaotic? 5-Are there any other changes in climate other than warming, and can they be attributed to the warming?Despite continued uncertainties, the review finds affirmative answers to these questions. Of particular interest are advances that seem to explain why satellites do not see as much warming as surface instruments, how we are getting a good idea of recent paleoclimates, and why the 20thcentury temperature record was so complex. It makes the point that in each area new information could come to light that would change our thinking on the quantitative magnitude and timing of anthropogenic warming, but it is unlikely to alter the basic conclusions.Finally, there is a very brief discussion of the societal policy response to the scientific message, and the author comments on his 2-year email discussions with many of the world’s most outspoken critics of the anthropogenic warming hypothesis.

Sustainable Business Development by Responding to Climate Change

2016 ◽  
pp. 176-191
Author(s):  
Sujata Mukherjee ◽  
Arunavo Mukerjee
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Business Development ◽  
Sustainable Business ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Global Companies ◽  
The Cost

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report (2007) concluded that the globally averaged net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of the sources of global warming. The Stern Report (2007) corroborates this statement and states that anthropogenic CO2 influences the climate and stresses that the cost of mitigating against climate change is significantly lower than the cost of climate change. The Tata group companies have been actively seeking out experiences of other global companies to develop an effective action plan against climate change. The present paper seeks to review the role of the Tata group in addressing and abating the climate change. It further looks at the various Tata group companies like Tata Chemicals Limited, Tata Steel Europe, Tata Communications and Tata Motors and their ways to stay the course towards sustainable development

Sustainable Business Development by Responding to Climate Change

2017 ◽  
pp. 416-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sujata Mukherjee ◽  
Arunavo Mukerjee
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Business Development ◽  
Sustainable Business ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Global Companies ◽  
The Cost

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report (2007) concluded that the globally averaged net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of the sources of global warming. The Stern Report (2007) corroborates this statement and states that anthropogenic CO2 influences the climate and stresses that the cost of mitigating against climate change is significantly lower than the cost of climate change. The Tata group companies have been actively seeking out experiences of other global companies to develop an effective action plan against climate change. The present paper seeks to review the role of the Tata group in addressing and abating the climate change. It further looks at the various Tata group companies like Tata Chemicals Limited, Tata Steel Europe, Tata Communications and Tata Motors and their ways to stay the course towards sustainable development

Global Impacts of Climate Change

2011 ◽  
pp. 66-92
Author(s):  
Costas P. Pappis
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Physical Science ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Assessment Report ◽  
Fourth Assessment Report ◽  
Global Impacts ◽  
Basic Facts

In the previous chapter, the basic facts regarding global warming have been presented, summarizing mainly the latest scientific findings reported by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), particularly in Working Group I’s Fourth Assessment Report on the Physical Science Basis of Climate Change (Forster et al., 2007).

scholarly journals Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b)

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4321-4345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja Frieler ◽  
Stefan Lange ◽  
Franziska Piontek ◽  
Christopher P. O. Reyer ◽  
Jacob Schewe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emission ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Economic Conditions ◽  
Impact Model ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Simulation Protocol ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. In Paris, France, December 2015, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) invited the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. In Nairobi, Kenya, April 2016, the IPCC panel accepted the invitation. Here we describe the response devised within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) to provide tailored, cross-sectorally consistent impact projections to broaden the scientific basis for the report. The simulation protocol is designed to allow for (1) separation of the impacts of historical warming starting from pre-industrial conditions from impacts of other drivers such as historical land-use changes (based on pre-industrial and historical impact model simulations); (2) quantification of the impacts of additional warming up to 1.5 °C, including a potential overshoot and long-term impacts up to 2299, and comparison to higher levels of global mean temperature change (based on the low-emissions Representative Concentration Pathway RCP2.6 and a no-mitigation pathway RCP6.0) with socio-economic conditions fixed at 2005 levels; and (3) assessment of the climate effects based on the same climate scenarios while accounting for simultaneous changes in socio-economic conditions following the middle-of-the-road Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2, Fricko et al., 2016) and in particular differential bioenergy requirements associated with the transformation of the energy system to comply with RCP2.6 compared to RCP6.0. With the aim of providing the scientific basis for an aggregation of impacts across sectors and analysis of cross-sectoral interactions that may dampen or amplify sectoral impacts, the protocol is designed to facilitate consistent impact projections from a range of impact models across different sectors (global and regional hydrology, lakes, global crops, global vegetation, regional forests, global and regional marine ecosystems and fisheries, global and regional coastal infrastructure, energy supply and demand, temperature-related mortality, and global terrestrial biodiversity).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document