Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Dialectics of Art' - in Response To Ian Birchall Is There Time For System Change?
The Dialectics of Art' - in Response To Ian Birchall Is There Time For System Change?
Time is always an important factor in politics and history but never has it mattered as much as on the issue of
climate change.
The IPCC Report’s warning in October 2018 that the world has twelve years to avoid climate disaster was
undoubtedly a major factor in galvanising a global wave of climate change activism, especially in the form of Greta
Thunberg and mass school strikes and the Extinction Rebellion movement. At the same it is clear that this warning
could be, and was, ‘heard’ or interpreted in different ways by different people. In this article I want consider some of
those interpretations and their implications, particularly in relation to the question of whether there is time to bring
about system change or whether, because time is so short, it is necessary to focus on and settle for changes that can
be implemented within the framework of capitalism.
Before coming to that, however, I want to suggest that many an opportunist politician will have heard the twelve
year warning quite differently from Greta and her followers. To them twelve years would be a very long time indeed:
three US Presidential terms, two full length parliamentary terms in Britain and many other countries; in other
words more than enough time to fulfil your ambitions, secure your place in the history books or, at least, secure
your pension and several directorships, before anything serious would have to be done at all. The only practical
implication of the twelve year warning would be the need to set up various commissions, draw up some action
plans, attend a few conferences and generally engage in a certain amount of greenwashing. Should you be the CEO
of a major oil, gas or car company exactly the same would apply.
At the opposite end of the spectrum there were large numbers of people, especially young people, who ‘heard’ the
warning as meaning that there was, literally, only twelve years to prevent global extinction.
These are not equivalent misreadings : the first is utterly cynical and immensely damaging to humans and nature
alike; the second is naive but well intentioned. But they are both misreadings of what the report said and of what
climate change is. Climate change is not an event that may or may not happen in 2030 and which might be averted
by emergency action at the last minute, but a process which is already underway. Every week, month or year of
delay in reducing carbon emissions exacerbates the problem and makes it harder to tackle. By the same token, there
is no absolute deadline after which it will be too late to do anything and we might as well give up the ghost.
The focus of the IPCC Report was not on ‘extinction’ but mainly on what would be required to hold global warming
to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and what would be the likely effects of allowing it to reach 2C. What it actually
stated in its Summary for Policy Makers was:
A1. Human activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1.0°C of global warming
above pre-industrial levels, with a likely range of 0.8°C to 1.2°C. Global warming is likely to reach
1.5°C between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate. (high confidence) (Figure
SPM.1) {1.2}
https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/
Last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that to keep the rise in global
temperatures below 1.5C this century, emissions of carbon dioxide would have to be cut by 45% by
2030. But today, observers recognise that the decisive, political steps to enable the cuts in carbon to take
place will have to happen before the end of next year.
A.1.2. Warming greater than the global annual average is being experienced in many land regions and
seasons, including two to three times higher in the Arctic. Warming is generally higher over land than over
the ocean. (high confidence) {1.2.1, 1.2.2, Figure 1.1, Figure 1.3, 3.3.1, 3.3.2}
B.1.2. Temperature extremes on land are projected to warm more than GMST (high confidence): extreme hot
days in mid-latitudes warm by up to about 3°C at global warming of 1.5°C and about 4°C at 2°C, and
extreme cold nights in high latitudes warm by up to about 4.5°C at 1.5°C and about 6°C at 2°C (high
confidence). The number of hot days is projected to increase in most land regions, with highest increases in
the tropics (high confidence). {3.3.1, 3.3.2, Cross-Chapter Box 8 in Chapter 3}
B.1.3. Risks from droughts and precipitation deficits are projected to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of
global warming in some regions (medium confidence). Risks from heavy precipitation events are projected
to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of global warming in several northern hemisphere high-latitude
and/or high-elevation regions, eastern Asia and eastern North America (medium confidence). Heavy
precipitation associated with tropical cyclones is projected to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C global
warming (medium confidence). There is generally low confidence in projected changes in heavy
precipitation at 2°C compared to 1.5°C in other regions. Heavy precipitation when aggregated at global
scale is projected to be higher at 2°C than at 1.5°C of global warming (medium confidence). As a
consequence of heavy precipitation, the fraction of the global land area affected by flood hazards is
projected to be larger at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of global warming (medium confidence). {3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4,
3.3.5, 3.3.6}
https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/
B.5. Climate-related risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security, and economic
growth are projected to increase with global warming of 1.5°C and increase further with 2°C. (Figure SPM.2)
{3.4, 3.5, 5.2, Box 3.2, Box 3.3, Box 3.5, Box 3.6, Cross-Chapter Box 6 in Chapter 3, Cross-Chapter Box 9 in
Chapter 4, Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 5, 5.2}
C.2. Pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot would require rapid and far-
reaching transitions in energy, land, urban and infrastructure (including transport and buildings), and
industrial systems (high confidence). These systems transitions are unprecedented in terms of scale, but
not necessarily in terms of speed, and imply deep emissions reductions in all sectors, a wide portfolio of
mitigation options and a significant upscaling of investments in those options (medium confidence). {2.3,
2.4, 2.5, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5}
What Does '12 Years to Act on Climate Change' (Now 11 Years) Really Mean?
BY BOB BERWYN, INSIDECLIMATE NEWS
AUG 27, 2019
Mid-century is actually the more significant target date in the report, but acting now is crucial to being able to
meet that goal, said Duke University climate researcher Drew Shindell, a lead author on the mitigation chapter of
the IPCC report.
"We need to get the world on a path to net zero CO2 emissions by mid-century," Shindell said. "That's a huge
transformation, so that if we don't make a good start on it during the 2020s, we won't be able to get there at a
reasonable cost."