It was a subject of some discussion years ago when the debate focused on whether the world had shifted from one geological epoch, the gentle Holocene, into a new, man-made epoch, the more dangerous Anthropocene. How would we adapt to a world with a broken hydrologic cycle, hotter everything (atmosphere, seas, land masses), a world in which severe storm events increased in frequency, intensity and duration, a world in which all lifeforms, including diseases and pests, migrated as never beforfe, a world beset by droughts, floods and food insecurity.
As Calgary suffered its worst ever flooding in 2013, a professor emeritus from McGill who specialized in disaster engineering opined that replacing, repairing and reinforcing Canada's essential infrastructure would costs upwards of a trillion dollars. That was about the time we stopped talking of climate adaptation. A trillion dollars is quite the buzz kill.
We turned our attention instead to mitigation, cutting greenhouse gas emissions, promises that didn't involve spending money now.
Canada's dereliction isn't unique. Many, most, countries are also dodging this costly problem.
Extreme weather driven by climate breakdown is hitting the world “with a new ferocity”, the UN has said, but countries have so far failed to prepare for the widespread damage that is now inevitable even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced.
We don't want to fund adaptation measures in our own country. That gives you an idea how eager we are to fund adaptation programmes in the Third World, the poorest and most vulnerable states.
In its sixth Adaptation Gap report, Unep [UN Environment Programme] called on donor countries to focus more international aid on climate adaptation and find ways to involve private-sector finance, and it called for all countries to use more of the trillions they are pouring into economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic to help protect against the impacts of climate breakdown. Such efforts could create jobs and prosperity as well as protecting people, experts said.
Inger Andersen, the executive director of Unep, said that although efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and limit global temperature rises must continue, countries meeting at Cop26 must also put more effort into preparing for the impacts of the climate crisis that are now inevitable even if the world fulfils the Paris agreement and limits temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
She said: “[This year] was the year in which climate impacts hit developed and developing countries with a new ferocity. ...So, even as we look to step up efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions – efforts that are still not anywhere strong enough – we must dramatically up our game to adapt.”
Hannah Cloke, a professor of hydrology at the University of Reading, said: “This latest report from the UN shows that the world is not doing enough to prepare for extreme climate events such as floods, droughts and wildfires that cause severe disruption to people’s lives. Even if Cop26 finished with a plan to phase out fossil fuels and cut emissions to zero, we would still have to live with the impact of the warming we have already caused, which we know has made many types of extreme weather events much more likely. Adapting to climate risk means taking a proactive response, by investing in better buildings, infrastructure and early-warning systems.”
Scientists backed up Unep’s call. Brian O’Callaghan, the lead researcher at the Oxford University economic recovery project, who has shown that a green recovery from Covid-19 could generate jobs and economic benefits, said: “Covid-19 recovery spending has so far not prioritised green investment – and more than any other sub-category, adaptation and resilience needs have been ignored. By failing to invest in climate adaptation, it seems like we’ve gone skydiving and decided we don’t need a parachute.”
Comments
Post a Comment