banner
logo
black cross ✖



Key climate information

For more details via infoboxes: hover, click or double-click on any highlighted text

For making good decisions on climate change, some key points are:
The science of climate change
Every tonne of CO2 emissions adds to global warming
Global temperature increases with cumulative CO<small>2</small> emissions
  • Global temperatures have risen steadily as mankind has deposited CO2 into the atmosphere.
  • This is causing unacceptable levels of climate deaths, climate refugees, biodiversity loss and sea level rise.
The urgency of action on climate change
  • The global
    carbon budget
    for limiting global warming to 1.5°C runs out in 2030, and it's even sooner in developed countries
    e.g. 2027 for the UK
    .
  • This means radical changes in lifestyles for many until renewable alternatives are developed, if temperature targets are to be met.
What should have been done by governments and wider society
  • discussion of the implications of the Paris and other agreements
  • agreement of a plan to eliminate fossil fuels, and
  • implementation of the plan.
What has actually been done
  • many declarations of a climate emergency
  • but discussions and planning have been of non-emergency policies
  • little action, with the consequence that total global CO2 emissions are still rising.
What has gone wrong
  • in summary, a widespread failure of decision making
  • an almost universal failure to face up to the urgency of action
  • instead, inadequate government timescales (such as Net Zero 2050) have dominated discussions and have been little challenged
  • this is a general failure across society: by government scientists, politicians, the media, climate advocacy groups, businesses, the legal system, and others
  • the flawed decision making seems to be not just misunderstandings but a form of
    climate denial
    termed implicatory denial by psychologists
  • even climate campaigners are part of the problem, with fragmentation of climate advocacy efforts, and inconsistent, inadequate and chaotic policy proposals.
What choices do we have now
  • to face up to the urgency of action, or to continue with the denial
  • to organise radical change, or have disorganised radical change forced upon us
  • to continue with inadequate policies or to treat climate change as an
    emergency
  • to continue with the target of limiting global warming to 1.5°C or to accept the system has failed and consider a higher limit of e.g. 1.6°C.

The science of climate change

Global temperatures have risen steadily as mankind has deposited CO2 into the atmosphere.

This is causing unacceptable levels of climate deaths, climate refugees, biodiversity loss and sea level rise - see document 144: Mortality and other harms from climate change

If global warming continues, catastrophic tipping points in the climate system will be passed and changes will become abrupt and/or irreversible. The effects on the planet including mankind will then accelerate. The most important tipping points are
  • melting of ice
    • irreversible meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet
    • irreversible retreat of the West Antarctic ice sheet, or of Wilkes Basin in East Antarctica
  • ocean currents and atmopheric circulation
    • collapse of the oceanic Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)
    • disruption of the West African monsoon, and of the South Asian/Indian summer monsoon
  • biosphere tipping points including
    • large-scale dieback of the Amazon rainforest and of boreal forests.



The urgency of action on climate change

UK carbon budget chart for net zero 2050
  • the urgency of action is given by the global
    carbon budget
    for 1.5°C running out in 2030, and even sooner in developed countries
    e.g. 2027 for the UK
  • this means radical changes in lifestyles for many until renewable alternatives are developed, if temperature targets are to be met
  • the climate has changed particularly rapidly in the last few years suggesting that even more urgent change is needed.

What should have been done by governments and wider society

"limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid and far-reaching transitions" (IPCC, 2018)
"These systems transitions ... imply deep emissions reductions in all sectors" (IPCC, 2018)
"immediate, rapid and large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions" (IPCC, 2021)
"This is a climate emergency"
(UN Secretary-General, 2022)
There should have been a discussion of the implications of the Paris Agreement, agreement of a plan to eliminate fossil fuels, and implementation of the plan.
A strategy should have been devised with the following key elements
  • an assessment of the degree of urgency of action: leading to a decision of emergency (not routine) action
  • a decision on the main objective: deciding on a limit to global warming of 1.5°C
  • an understanding of the science of achieving this objective: staying within the appropriate carbon budget
  • including the commitment in the Paris Agreement to equity between nations
  • using a fair accounting system: including all CO2 emissions
  • stating clearly the required speed of change: double digit percentage annual emission cuts
  • detailing credibly compliant policies
  • quality control measures should have worked, e.g. avoiding false solutions.
See more at carbonindependent.org/100.html.

What has actually been done

There have been many declarations of a climate emergency, but
  • there has been no general discussion of the imminent exhaustion of the carbon budget - inadequate government timescales dominate discussions and have not been challenged
  • there has been no competent plan - planning has been of non-emergency policies
  • there has been little action

What has gone wrong: a widespread failure of decision making

  • there has been no general discussion of the imminent exhaustion of a fair carbon budget - 2027 in the UK for compliance with the 1.5°C commitment
  • instead, the urgency of action has been understated - inadequate government timescales (such as Net Zero 2050) dominate discussions and have been little challenged - with inadequate policies being advocated and planned
  • this is a general failure across society: by government scientists, politicians, the media, climate advocacy groups, sceptics of climate action, businesses, the legal system, other organisations, and individuals
  • the evidence is that it is not a sporadic problem, and that it is not a conspiracy of oil companies or billionnaires (as sometimes stated) - instead there is a widespread failure of decision making
  • even climate campaigners have understated the size and urgency of changes needed, with fragmentation of climate advocacy efforts, leading to chaotic, inconsistent and inadequate policy proposals
  • flawed campaigning seems to be not just misunderstanding but a form of
    climate denial
    termed implicatory denial by psychologists.

Why has decision making been so poor

Despite appearances, the squares marked A and B in the optical illusion are
actually the same shade of grey!
Checker shadow illusion Attribution: Edward H. Adelson: Checker shadow illusion
People are fallible - what appears obvious to someone can be incorrect - as in the optical illusion
- resulting in widespread failure of decision making

It seems that decisions are flawed because of
  • ignorance
  • cognitive biases including
    • arrogance/overconfidence
    • groupthink
    • the bystander effect
  • self-interest
  • lack of accountability.

What choices do we have now

  • our current lifestyles are unsustainable, so radical change is coming - we can choose to organise radical change, or have disorganised radical change forced upon us
  • whether to continue with inadequate non-emergency policies or treat climate change as the highest priority i.e. as an
    emergency
  • What target for climate action should be adopted
    • the Paris Agreement commitment was to limit global warming to 1.5°C or at least well under 2.0°C - the target has been 1.5°C, but the fair UK carbon budget for 1.5°C runs out in 2027 - there is a choice of whether to continue with the target of limiting global warming to 1.5°C or to accept that the system has failed and consider a higher limit of e.g. 1.6°C


First published: 13 Feb 2025
Last updated: 22 Nov 2025     Page No: 184