Humanity is facing “an existential threat” from climate change as the world is “nearing the point of no return”. These were the stark warnings issued by the UN General-Secretary three years ago. With an imminent threat to the survival of our species, one would expect swift and decisive actions from our world leaders, as if we had to win a war. Don’t we all want to ensure the survival of our kids and future generations? Alas, the global response has been lacklustre, timid at best, with current policies falling significantly short of averting the projected climate catastrophe. But there is still hope. Both the public support for genuine climate change action and the attractive business case of doing so are gaining momentum. But time is running out.
Climate change is caused by human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, most of which stems from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas. The threat posed by climate change has been understood in the scientific community since the 1970s, but it has only reached broader public awareness in the late 1980s, which set the stage for establishing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the Rio Summit in 1992. Nevertheless, despite almost three decades of subsequent international climate summits and ratification of various climate agreements, the annual greenhouse gas emissions have increased by almost 40 per cent, instead of going down. In other words, “three decades of bla bla bla”, as climate activist Greta Thunberg summarily formulated in her powerful speech at The Davos Agenda 2021, The World Economic Forum. As a result, the planet is getting warmer and warmer from the increasing burning of fossil fuels. By 2020, the planet has already warmed to 1.25 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, which is close to the 1.5-degrees-Celsius safe upper limit to steer clear of the “point of no return”, as advised by climate scientists. At the current rate of greenhouse gas emissions—1,331 tonnes of CO2
emissions
per second—the world will warm to 1.5 degrees Celsius in less than seven years.
The “point of no return” refers to the tipping point beyond which climate change becomes irreversible. Once the tipping point is reached, climate change starts to accelerate from positive feedback loops in nature regardless of human activity.
Disconcertingly, the climate scientists say that limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius only gives us a two-third chance of avoiding the “point of no return”. If global warming is allowed to increase to 2 degrees Celsius, the upper limit stated in the Paris [Climate] Agreement, the world only has a 50-50 chance of steering clear of a climate catastrophe. Put differently, the chances of the survival of our species comes down to a coin toss. Such low odds for survival are not
LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD It is time to address the elephant in the room: energy pricing. Currently, the true cost of energy is not reflected in the consumer price. The application of a “polluters pay” principle, where the harm caused by pollution is factored into the price, is rarely practised in Asia. On the contrary, dirty fossil fuels like coal and petrol are often subsidised. This results in an uneven playing field, where energy-efficient solutions and renewable energy alternatives have difficulty competing, because fossil fuels are artificially under-priced, or what economists denote as a post-tax subsidy. Case in point, the price of coal (USD4.4 per GJ) matches the supply cost in most countries, but coal should be more than double, once the cost of pollution is accounted for. The environmental cost of coal mostly stems from global warming and the adverse public health effects from air pollution. For
deemed acceptable anywhere else in our society. For example, how many people would board an airplane, if they were told its risk of crashing was 50-50? Nobody would board that plane. Yet, this is the gamble we are currently taking with the existential threat posed by climate change.
Equally alarming, the current climate policies are setting the world on a 3-degrees-Celsius global warming trajectory, which is not close to meeting the Paris Agreement goal. Moreover, the Paris Agreement is toothless without binding enforcement mechanisms to ensure that its signatories fulfil their climate commitments.
Amid this dire situation, there is a glimmer of
hope, as there is widespread public support for immediate action on climate change. In December 2020, a global opinion poll was conducted by UNDP among 1.2 million respondents in 50 counties. The poll found that two-thirds of the world’s population denote climate change as a “global emergency” and want “urgent action”. Equally important, there is a good business case to be made for transitioning away from fossil fuels. The Solutions Project led by Stanford University has calculated a 1.4-year payback time for transitioning the world away from fossil fuels to being powered 100 per cent by renewable energy.
The world is reaching an infliction point for transitioning to a clean energy future, thanks to high public demand, a strong business case and the moral imperative for doing so. Joseph Stiglitz, the chief economist at the World Bank, reminds us that the climate emergency is our “third world war [that] needs a bold response because we cannot afford not to act, as our civilisation is at stake”. This article outlines what needs to be done—including for the built environment—to help us steer clear of the climate catastrophe.
1 The planet is getting warmer from the increasing burning of fossil fuels like coal. By 2020, the planet has already warmed to 1.25 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, which is close to the 1.5-degree- Celsius safe upper limit
FUTURARC 67
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95
