This document discusses various methods for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and limiting global warming to less than 2°C, including reducing CO2 and other emissions, improving energy efficiency, expanding renewable energy and carbon sinks, implementing emissions trading programs, and negotiating international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement. However, it notes that most countries' commitments to date remain inadequate to meet the 2°C goal.

1. Fixing the
the climate
crisis
Reducing CO2 emissions ?
Removing CO2 ?
Solar radiation management ?
Adapt to a warmer World ?
Data collection and
presentation by
Carl Denef,
Januari 2014 1

2. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions ?
 Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are at a rate much higher than the rate of its
removal by the natural carbon cycle and emitted CO2 stays in the atmosphere for more
than 1000 years. A reduction of emission will therefore lead very slowly to a lower
atmospheric CO2 level. To illustrate this quantitatively, the Figure below shows model-
simulated changes of the concentration of a given greenhouse gas (CO2 or a fictitious
gas) under an emission reduction regime from 2000 onward of 10%, 30%, 50% and
100% as compared to maintaining emission constant. The greenhouse gas in ‘a’ is CO2,
driven by both natural and anthropogenic fluxes and in ’b’ a ficticious greenhouse gas
with a lifetime of 12 years, driven by only anthropogenic fluxes (no natural flux).
 A 50 % reduction in CO2 emission will lower the growth of atmospheric levels, but will not
lead to stabilization of the levels. To stabilize CO2 levels at the 2000 level a ~70%
reduction of emissions would be necessary. Under zero emission it would take more
b)
From IPCC AR4
FAQ 10.3, Figure 1,
with modifications
2

3. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions ?
 than 200 years to bring CO2 levels back to the 1970 level. In fact, a new equilibrium
with CO2 levels still higher than preindustrial would be reached after >1000 years (see
section ‘Climate change today’). In condition b with the short-lived ficticious gas
without natural flux, zero emission would bring atmospheric gas level back to
preindustrial within 50 years. If the gas in b were methane, for which there is a natural
flux (but life time also 12 years), zero emission would lead to a new equilibrium faster
than in the case of CO2 but at a considerably slower rate than the ficticious gas in b.
 Limitation of global warming rise to 2 °C, relative to the preindustral value, is
considered a relatively safe option for living in a warmer climate. To meet that goal,
climate models have calculated that total CO2 emissions from all anthropogenic
sources would need to be limited to a cumulative amount of ~1000 Gt Carbon over
the entire industrial era. About half (460–630 Gt) of this amount was already emitted
by 2011. Hence, emissions should be reduced and reach zero at a time point not later
than the time point at which the additional 500 Gt cumulative carbon emission has
been reached. However, since there is also a projected warming effect of non-CO2
sources, and since release from permafrost or methane hydrates cannot be excluded,
a lower cumulative budget would be required (see IPCC AR5 Figure 12.45).
3

4. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions ?
 As concluded in 2010 by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), meeting the 2 °C target would require annual global
emissions of greenhouse gases to peak before the year 2020, and decline
significantly thereafter, with emissions in 2050 reduced by 30-50% compared to 1990
levels.[Ref] Unfortunately, the previous slide (data from IPCC AR5) shows that these
reductions are insufficient. Studies by the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP)[Ref] and International Energy Agency[Ref] (IEA) also indicate that as of 2012
policies are too weak to achieve the 2 °C target. Even though Europe and the
United States reduced their emissions to 1990 levels in 2012, China, the largest
emitter today, continued to increase emissions, albeit with a lower growth rate and
with higher energy efficiency scores.
 A method for rapid cooling would be the drastic reduction of non-CO2 greenhouse
gases, black carbon and ozone emissions.[Ref] These substances have a much
shorter residence time in the atmosphere than CO2. Therefore, this method could
decrease global temperature much faster.
4

5. How to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
 By energy switch:
 Conversion of fossil to renewable or hydogen energy.
 Use of natural gas instead of oil and coal, as methane emits less CO2.
However, methane burning may give a false illusion of less CO2 emission
because gas exploitation, especially by shale gas fracting, causes spontaneous
methane release from the deposits.
 Development of U238 or thorium reactors for nuclear energy,
 Conversion of transportation by cars to electric public transportation, high-tech
subway systems, bicycling paths and walkways construction,
 By improving energy efficiency and conservation.
 Making older equipment more energy efficient,
 Improving the insulation of buildings against cold and heat, passive solar building
design, low-energy building, or zero-energy building techniques, using renewable
heat sources.
 Reduce, recover, recycle and reuse materials
 Changing management practices and consumer behavior
 Setup of a cache of secure fuel reserves
5

6. IEA proposal
 By the International Energy Agency (IEA) proposal. IEA has proposed 4 paths
to achieve a global stop in the growth of emissions by 2020.
6

7. Carbon sinks?
 By Increasing carbon sinks.[Ref]
• Protection of natural carbon sinks like forests and oceans,
• Creation of new natural sinks through green agriculture, forest management
and reforestation,
These methods could save at least 1Gt CO2/year, at an estimated cost of
$5/ton CO2 to $15/ton CO2. Pristine temperate forest has been shown to store
3 times more carbon than IPCC estimates took into account, and 60% more
carbon than plantation forest
• A method has been proposed to restore grasslands with fences on which small
paddocks and herds of sheep or goats are moved from one paddock to
another, allowing the grass to grow optimally. It is estimated that increasing the
carbon content of the soils in the World’s 3.5 billion hectares of agricultural
grassland by 1% would offset nearly 12 years of present CO2 emissions.
 By societal controls
• Population control: World population has tripled over the last 60 years,
which will contribute heavily to consumption and fossil fuel use in the future.
Various organizations promote population control through improving access to
family planning and information, reducing natalistic politics, public education
about the consequences of continued population growth, and improving access
of women to education and economic opportunities.7

8. Kyoto protocol?
• The Kyoto Protocol:[Ref] is an international treaty of the UNFCCC that sets
binding obligations on industrialized countries to reduce emissions of the 6 major
greenhouse gases. The treaty includes all the UN members, except Andorra,
Canada, South Sudan and the United States. Developing countries do not have
binding targets, but are still committed to reduce their emissions. The United
States signed but did not ratify the Protocol and Canada withdrew from it in 2011.
The first round to reach greenhouse gas limitation goals in the Kyoto protocol was
2008-2012. Emission quotas (known as “assigned amounts“) were allocated to
each of the committed countries ('Annex I' countries), with the intention of
reducing the overall emissions by 5.2% from their 1990 levels by the end of 2012.
The second commitment period applies to emissions between 2013-2020, but is
not yet agreed on at the date of this writing.
Annex I & II countries with binding targets
Developing countries without binding targets*
States not Party to the Protocol
Signatory country with no intention to ratify the treaty, with no binding targets
Countries that have renounced the Protocol, with no binding targets*
Parties with no binding targets in the second period, which previously had targets*
8

9. Copenhagen agreement
• The Copenhagen Agreement is an UNFCCC agreement made on 18
December 2009. [Ref] It "took note of" the severity and urgency to mitigate and
adapt to climate change and to plan large financial support to help developing
countries in adaptation and mitigation. Countries representing over 80% of
global emissions have only pledged non-binding commitments for emission
reduction by 2020 ranging between 5-25% and 20-30%, compared to 1990-
2000. Brazil pledged a reduction of 36.1% - 38.9%, Indonesia 26%, Mexico
30%, South Africa 34%, South Korea 30% relative to the ‘business-as-usual
scenario’. China and India promised to decrease Carbon intensity with 40-45
and 20-25%, respectively. China also promised to increase the share of non-
fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 15% by 2020, and increase
forest coverage by 40 million hectares and forest stock volume by 1.3 billion
cubic meters by 2020.
Criticism. The agreement was not legally binding, was drafted by only five
countries and does not commit countries to agree to a binding succession to the
Kyoto Protocol. The accord set no real targets in emissions cuts.The
mobilization of 100 billion dollars per year to developing countries will not be
fully in place until 2020 and there was no agreement on how much individual
countries would contribute to the financial funds. It has been calculated that the
net effect of the accord (if all promises are held) would result in a peaking of
emissions in 2020 with emissions level below 44 gigatons, to have a
9

10. Cancun agreement
reasonable chance of meeting the 2 °C warming target. On the contrary, with the
emission reductions of the Accord it will be ~50 gigatons. The International Energy
Agency (IEA) predicts a stabilization of greenhouse gases around 650 ppm, which
could lead to a global warming of 3.5 °C. Thus, the promises made in
Copenhagen are clearly unsatisfactory.
• The Cancun agreement (29 November to 10 December 2010) [Ref] is a UNFCCC
agreement that again emphasized the severity and urgency to mitigate and adapt to
climate change for all UNFCCC parties. The 2 °C warming target was maintained.
The agreement calls on rich countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as
pledged in the Copenhagen Accord, and for developing countries to ‘plan’ to reduce
their emissions. It recognized that Annex I Parties should reduce emissions in a
range of 25-40 % below 1990 levels by 2020. As part of the agreements, 76
developed and developing countries have made voluntary pledges to control their
emissions. The agreement includes a "Green Climate Fund,“ worth $100 billion/year
by 2020, to assist poorer countries in financing emission reductions and adaptation.
Criticism. There was no agreement on how to extend the Kyoto Protocol, no
legal binding, no decision on the level of emission cuts and how the $100
billion/year for the Green Climate Fund will be raised, nor whether rich countries
would have to reduce emissions first. There was no statement that countries had to
"peak" their emissions by 2020 and then rapidly reduce them in order to reach the 2
°C target.
10

11. Durban and Doha agreement
• The Durban agreement (28 November to 11 December 2011) .[Ref] It was
agreed to establish a legally binding deal comprising all countries by a treaty
in 2015, which was to take effect in 2020. The agreement included for the first
time developing countries such as China and India, as well as the US. The
agreement entails the continuation of the Kyoto protocol in the interim. For the
first time countries admitted that their current policies are inadequate and must
be strengthened by 2015.
Criticism. Actions will remain voluntary until 2015, making the chance to ever
reach the 2 °C limit small if any. What the legal binding will refer to remains
vague.
• The Doha agreement (26 November 2012 – 8 December 2012)[Ref] . It was
agreed to extend the life of the Kyoto Protocol until 2020. The Durban
agreement was confirmed. There was also an agreement in principle that richer
nations could be held financially responsible to other nations for their failure to
reduce carbon emissions, which means that countries vulnerable to the effects
of climate change may be financially compensated in the future by countries that
fail to reduce their carbon emissions.
Criticism. It is highly deplorable that the extension of the Kyoto protocol is
limited in scope to only 15% reduction of global CO2 emissions due to the lack
of participation of Canada, Japan, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, New Zealand
and the United States and due to the fact that developing countries like
11

12. Warsaw agreement
China (the world's largest emitter), India and Brazil are not subject to any
emissions reductions under the Kyoto Protocol. The conference made little
progress towards the funding of the Green Climate Fund.
• The Warsaw agreement (11-22 November 2013)[Ref] . The conference led to an
agreement that all states would ‘start cutting emissions’ ‘as soon as possible’, and
announced that the exact emission level they would try to meet will be given by the
first quarter of 2015. The original aim of the Durban agreement, for a global
agreement involving all parties in a legally binding agreement in 2015 was
preserved. On the last day of the conference WWF, Oxfam, ActionAid, the
International Trade Union Confederation, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace
walked out of the conference as a protest that not enough progress was made.
• Emission quotas and emissions trading (‘cap and trade’). [Ref] This is a market-
based method to indirectly reduce emissions. A central authority (usually a
government) sets a limit or cap on the amount of greenhouse gas that companies
may emit. The cap can also be sold to firms in the form of emissions permits.
Firms are required to hold a number of permits (allowances or carbon credits),
equivalent to their emissions. Firms that need to increase their emission output for
productivity puposes must buy permits from those who require fewer permits. The
transfer of permits is referred to as a trade. The buyer is paying a charge for
polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions. The
12

13. Carbon offsets
largest cap and trade system is the European Union Emission Trading Scheme. In
the United States there is a national market to reduce acid rain and several
regional markets in nitrogen oxides.
Criticism: Regulatory agencies run the risk of issuing too many emission credits,
which can result in a very low price of emission permits, which actually is the
case at present. This reduces the incentive of firms to cut back their emissions. On
the other hand, issuing too few permits can result in an excessively high permit
price. Reducing global warming will require more radical change than the
modest changes obtained by cap and trade. Carbon trading has rewarded the
heaviest emitters and encouraged business-as-usual as expensive long-term
structural changes will not be made if there is a cheaper source of carbon credits.
• Carbon offsets [Ref] refers to the market-based purchase of carbon credits to
compensate for an emission made elsewhere. Offsets are typically achieved on
the basis of projects that reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. The most
common project type is renewable energy development, often by planting trees
for biofuels or for expanding the carbon sink. One carbon offset represents the
offset of one metric ton of greenhouse gases. In the larger ‘compliance market’ ,
companies, governments, or other entities buy carbon offsets in order to comply
with their caps. In 2006, about $5.5 billion of carbon offsets were purchased in the
compliance market, equivalent of about 1.6 gigatonnes of CO2 reductions. In the
13

14. much smaller voluntary market, individuals, companies, or governments purchase
carbon offsets to compensate for their own emissions from transportation,
electricity use, and other sources.
• Controversies: Certified offsets may be purchased from commercial or non-profit
organizations for US$0.50–30 per ton CO2, with large fluctuations of market price.
But many types of offsets are difficult to verify. Some activists disagree with the
principle of carbon offsets, as they are a way for the guilty to pay for absolution
rather than changing emission behavior. Some environmentalists have questioned
the effectiveness of tree-planting projects for carbon offset purposes. Project
developers and offset retailers typically pay for the project and sell the promised
reductions up-front, a practice known as "forward selling". Furthermore, it is
difficult to guarantee the permanence of the trees planted, which may be
susceptible to clearing, burning, or mismanagement. The planting of the "Coldplay
forest", supported by the British band Coldplay, resulted in a grove of dead mango
trees. Some projects plant fast-growing invasive species that end up damaging
native forests and reducing biodiversity. However, some certification standards,
such as the Climate Community and Biodiversity Standard require multiple species
plantings. Tree-planting projects can cause conflicts with indigenous people who
are displaced or find their forest resources cut down (see a World Rainforest
Movement report). Carbon reduction claims are sometimes exaggerated or
misleading. There are people and organizations buying worthless credits that do
not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.14

15. There are brokers providing services of questionable or no value.
Perverse incentives: Because offsets provide large revenues, they can provide
incentives to emit more, so that emitting companies can later get credit for
reducing emissions from an artificially high baseline. For example, a Chinese
company generated $500 million in carbon offsets by installing a $5 million
incinerator to burn halocarbons produced by the manufacture of refrigerants!
The huge profits made incentive to create new factories for making these
halocarbons or expand existing factories solely for the purpose of increasing
production of the halocarbons and then destroying the resultant pollutants to
generate offsets! The practice had become so widespread that offset credits
are now no longer awarded for new plants to destroy halocarbons. In Nigeria oil
companies flare off 40 % of the natural gas found. The Agip Oil Company plans
to build plants to generate electricity from this gas and thus claim 1.5 million
offset credits a year. The United States company Pan Ocean Oil Corporation
has also applied for credits in exchange for processing its own waste gas in
Nigeria! Clearly criminals abuse the society’s efforts and regulations to
mitigate climate change.
15

16. Other societal controls
• Emission tax [Ref] An emission tax demands individual emitters to pay a fee,
charge or tax for every ton of greenhouse gas released into the atmosphere.
Emission taxes can be both cost-effective and environmentally effective.
However, they cannot guarantee a particular level of emissions reduction.
Emissions or energy taxes also often fall disproportionately on lower income
classes.
• Non-governmental initiatives. Environmental groups encourage individual
action against global warming, often focusing on the consumer. Common
recommendations include lowering home heating and cooling usage, burning
less gasoline by lowering speed and driving less, supporting renewable energy
sources, buying local products to reduce transportation, turning off unused
devices, discouraging long-distance traveling of individuals and others.
• Legal action Those affected by climate change may be able to sue major
greenhouse gas producers, especially in countries where mitigation is under the
agreed target or in case of negligence. In 2008 James Hansen has called for
putting fossil fuel company executives, including the CEOs of ExxonMobil and
Peabody Coal, on trial for "high crimes against humanity and nature", on the
grounds that these and other fossil-fuel companies had actively spread
doubt and misinformation about global warming, in the same way as
tobacco companies tried to hide the link between smoking and cancer.
[Ref][Ref][Ref]
16

17. • Change behavior through policy making such as the 4 E approach (Read more)
 Enable: make it easier to act – remove barriers/ensure ability to act/provide
facilities/educate/provide alternatives
 Engage: get individual people involved rather than remote messaging– use
networks/coproduce/organize discussion forums face-to-face/use insight to
mobilize groups
 Exemplify: demonstrate shared responsibilities – lead by example/be
consistent in policies/show others are acting too.
 Encourage : provide incentives (price and funding benefits) and remove
elements that prevent or discourage action
17

18. What has already been realized?
The Permaculture ideology: aims the rebuilding of local food networks and
energy production, and the general implementation of "energy descent
culture“, as an ethical response to the acknowledgment of finite fossil
resources. Energy descent culture is a transitional phase culture, when
mankind goes from the ascending use of energy that has occurred since the
industrial revolution to a descending use of energy.[169]
The Transition Towns movement: started in Totnes (Devon, UK - near
Plymouth) and spread internationally by "The Transition Handbook“, “The
transition companion” (Rob Hopkins), and Transition Network. It sees the
restructuring of society for more “resilience and ecological stewardship”
as a natural response to the combination of ‘peak oil’ and climate change.[171]
Novel bank systems, such as the Triodos Bank, that invest only in
ecological, social and cultural projects instead of maximizing financial
profit that often canalyzes money from poorer to richer people. As of 2009
some 30 banks with ecosustainable focus have assembled worldwide in the
‘Global Alliance for Banking on Values’
The Blue Economy: initiated by Gunter Pauli, founder and director of Zero
Emissions Research and Initiatives. The Blue Economy initiative introduced
many innovations in the context of water, energy, building and food supply,
that primarily seek to respond to the basic needs of all with what we have
48
18

19. locally. It stands for a different way of designing business by using the
resources available in cascading systems of the local environment, where the
waste of one product becomes the input to create a new one and a new cash
flow. It aims at creating jobs, building up social capital and rising income while
saving the environment.
Cradle to Cradle design: In this model, all materials used in industrial or commercial
processes—such as metals, fibers, dyes—fall into one of two categories:
"technical" or "biological" nutrients. Technical nutrients are strictly limited to non-
toxic, non-harmful synthetic materials that have no negative effects on the
natural environment; they can be used in continuous cycles as the same
product without losing their integrity or quality. In this manner these materials can
be used over and over again instead of being "downcycled" into lesser products,
ultimately becoming waste. Biological Nutrients are organic materials that, once
used, can be disposed of in any natural environment and decompose into the
soil, providing food for small life forms without affecting the natural environment.
This model has been implemented by a number of companies, organizations and
governments around the world, predominantly in the European Union, China and
the United States.
19

20. However, there is still a long way to go….
The 3 most negative factors affecting ability to reduce energy consumption are the
wish to maintain comfort, the lack of cooperation of others and cost.
49b
20

21. Removing CO2 ? (‘Carbon dioxide removal’ CDR)
 The only direct way to fix the climate crisis is to remove CO2, the causal factor, from the
atmosphere, and permanently sequester it on a large scale (see more details in IPCC AR5
FAQ 7.3, Figure 1).
Several theoretical methods have been advanced, such as :
 Chemical capture of atmospheric CO2, and storage either underground in geological formations
(oil fields, gas fields, saline formations, unminable coal seams, and saline-filled basalt
formations) or in the ocean,
 CO2 capture during biomass energy production and storage either underground in geological
formations or in the ocean. Bio-energy from biomass is a renewable energy source and biomass
serves as a carbon sink during its growth.
 Addition of nutrients to the ocean, which increases oceanic bioproductivity in the surface ocean
waters and transports a fraction of the resulting biogenic carbon downward
 Enhancement of CO2 sinks through reforestation and afforestation (establishment of forests in
an area where there was no forest before).
 Capture of CO2 by algae farming and carbon sequestration by burial.
 Enhancement of the natural weathering rate of silicate rocks that sequesters CO2, and
transportation of the dissolved carbonate minerals to the ocean
 Addition of alkalinity from solid minerals to the ocean, which causes more atmospheric CO2 to
dissolve in the ocean
 Extraction of alkalinity from mined silicate rocks and mixing with atmospheric CO2 to produce
solid carbonate minerals
21

22. Potentials: Geological formations and oceans could store each several thousand Gt
Carbon.
Reforestation could refill the cumulative historical land use loss of 180 Gt Carbon.
Carbon capture is of proven value on a small scale in horticulture. CO2 emitted by
power plants is transported to the horticulture greenhouses via old oil pipelines and
used as fertilizer for the growth of vegetables and flowers. In many greenhouses
electricity for lighting and ventilation is generated locally and the heat lost in the
generator is used for warming in winter (cogeneration), while the produced CO2 is
flown over the plants as fertilizer. In the Netherlands, the World leader, 9000
greenhouses are operating in this way today, representing 10.000 ha and 150.000
jobs.
 Criticism None of the present methods is garanteed to be satisfactory in terme of
safety, feasibililty and effectivity on a planetary scale. Uncertainties make it difficult
to quantify how much CO2 emissions could be offset by CDR on a human timescale,
although it is likely that at least one century is needed to significantly reduce
atmospheric CO2. Moreover, it is virtually certain that storage of CO2 will be partially
offset by outgassing of CO2 from the ocean and land ecosystems, a so-called
rebound effect. Addition of CO2 to the oceans further acidifies the ocean, which is
deleterious to marine ecosystems. Addition of nutrients to the ocean may destroy
ecosystem equilibrium, enhances N2O emissions and removes less than100 ppm
22

23. atmospheric CO2 from the atmosphere. Underground storage could leak to the
atmosphere or massively be released after earth quakes. Carbon capture and
sequestration linked to fossil fuel power plants is more expensive than renewable
energy deployment. It has been calculated that the cost would be 12-62 billion euro
per gigaton of captured CO2. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, this would
represent a near doubling of costs of energy production. Algae farming may lead to
expanded regions with low oxygen concentration, increased N2O production, deep
ocean acidification and disruptions to marine ecosystems and regional carbon cycle.
Read more
23

24. Adapt to a warmer World ?
 Climate change adaptation is defined as the adjustment of human and eco systems to
reduce vulnerability to the negative effects of climate change and to increase the
resilience of these systems.[Ref] The IPCC defines adaptation as the adjustment in
natural or human systems to a new or changing environment. The aim is to moderate
harm or to exploit beneficial opportunities. “Various types of adaptation can be
distinguished, including anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private and public
adaptation, and autonomous and planned adaptation.”
 Climate change adaptation requires both policy instruments and technology and
must be used in the context of sustainable development. Adaptation also depends
on the way that climate changes are negotiated through complex social systems.
In the February 8, 2007 issue of the journal Nature, science policy experts stated that
engaging in global adaptation to climate change would be as important in dealing
with global warming as reducing CO2 emissions.[Ref] Moreover, it should be
realized that due to the lag times in the global climate system, no emission cutting
effort, no matter how rigorous and relentless, will prevent climate change from
happening in the next few decades. Therefore, adaptation measures must be
enforced.
Adaptation measures are on the road but are far insufficient for the expected climate
impacts in the future.
24

25. Methods of adaptation[Ref]
Humans have always been confronted with climate variabilities that endangered their habitats.
They always adapted to it, in the worst case by migration. However, climate change is now
of a global dimension, and human population size became immense, making adaptation
more complicated. The following paths have been investigated:
 Enhancing adaptive capacity
At present, many countries that did not contribute to greenhouse gas emissions suffer and
will suffer the most of climate change. Moreover, these countries have the least capacity
and resources to adapt. Therefore, help from rich counties is mandatory.
It could consist of:
 Reducing poverty, improving access to resources, lowering inequities of resources
and wealth among groups, improving education and information, improving
infrastructure
There is also a need for strategies of integration of the climate change plans and
development plans. The Institute of Development Studies tries to find ways to combine
adaptation and poverty management.
 Local landuse and municipal planning
 Preventing the impacts of rising sea levels, planting heat tolerant tree varieties, changing
to water permeable pavements to absorb more rain and avoid floods, adding air
conditioning in public schools, building rainwater storage in urban areas to cope with
25

26. Increasingly severe storms, separating stormwater from blackwater, so that overflows in
peak periods do not contaminate rivers, expanding green zones in cities which have a
several °C cooling effect, making buildings less heat absorbing in summer, providing
habitats in gardens for the most threatened species, saving water by use plants in gardens
that require less water.
 Agriculture
Global climate change is altering global rainfall patterns. Extended drought, but also
prolonged rain and floods, can cause the failure of farms with resultant economic, political
and social disruption.
This could be avoided by:
Development of crop varieties with greater drought tolerance, modernising existing
irrigation methods of farming, supporting farmer's efforts to find their own water supplies
and tapping into groundwater in a sustainable way, providing farmers with rainwater
storage facilities.
 Weather control
Presently, research is being conducted to induce artificial raining by exploiting the urban
heat island effect. Cities are hotter than the land around them because they are darker and
absorb more heat. This creates 28% more rain 30–60 km downwind from cities than
upwind. Agriculture could be developed around cities within these forced rain areas (urban
agriculture). On the timescale of several decades, new weather control techniques may
26

27. become feasible which would allow control of extreme weather events.
 Damming glacial lakes
A glacial lake is a lake formed by melting water of glaciers withheld by a dam of obstructing
material (ice or moraine) at the front of the glacier. The dam can brake and cause a glacial
lake outburst flood (GLOF). Dam failure can happen due to erosion, buildup of water
pressure, an avalanche or an earthquake. There are many examples of death and destruction
due to GLOF. Global warming could increase the incidence of GLOF. Building dams around
the moraine could not only protect against GLOF, but the lake could also serve as an
hydroelectric power plant.
 Migration
It is frequently the last adaptive response people will take when confronted with
environmental factors that threaten their livelihoods. The UNESCO publication, Migration and
Climate Change, explores the dynamics of environmental migration as an adaptive response
to climate change.[Ref]
 Finances
Several organizations in the World help financing climate change adaptation, such as Global
Environmental Facility, the GEF Trust Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF),
the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF), the Adaptation Fund (negotiations during
UNFCCC agreement meetings COP15 and COP16), official development assistance or ODA,
market-based mechanisms, such as the Higher Ground Foundation's vulnerability reduction
27

28. credit (VRC™) or a program similar to the Clean Development Mechanism, to raise private
money for climate change adaptation. The Green Climate Fund from the 2010 United
Nations Climate Change Conference pledged sending $100 billion per year to developing
countries in assistance for climate change mitigation and adaptation through 2020, although
it is not binding. UNFCCC helps least developed countries (LDCs) identify their climate
change adaptation needs by funding the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA).
NAPAs are meant to provide LDCs with an opportunity to identify their “urgent and
immediate needs” for adapting to climate change; LDCs that submit NAPAs to the
UNFCCC then become eligible for funding.
28

29. Reducing warming by Solar Radiation Management
(SRM) ?
Global warming could theoretically be antagonized if material reflecting sun light could be
massively distributed over the globe (see IPCC AR5 FAQ 7.3, Figure 1).
In contrast to carbon sequestration projects SRM works quickly.
The following devices and methods have been suggested[Ref] :
 Reflective balloons placed in the stratosphere to reflect solar radiation, The cost is too
high since billions of balloons are needed.
 Aerosols injected in the stratosphere to inrease albedo: Delivery of precursor sulfide gases
such as sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or sulfur dioxide (SO2) by artillery, aircraft and
balloons has been proposed. Sulfur injections to counteract effects of doubling CO2
concentrations would cost $25–50 billion/year. This is over 100 times cheaper than producing
the same temperature change by reducing CO2 emissions. It may prevent climate tipping
points, such as the loss of the Arctic summer sea ice, Arctic methane hydrate release and loss
of the Greenland ice sheet.
 Increasing marine cloud reflectivity to increase albedo,[Ref] Ships spray tiny water droplets
into the low level clouds to enhance their reflectivity. Approximately 1,500 of these ships would
be required for the scheme to effectively cool the planet.
 Suppression of high-level clouds (cirrus), as these clouds have a strong greenhouse effect.
 Microbubbles of air or latex particles injected in the ocean surface to make it more
reflective,[Ref]
 Growing crops that are more reflective,
 White paint on roofs and building walls.
29

30. Criticism
Aerosols need to be delivered at high altitude to ensure efficacy for several years. The
precursor gases need to be delivered in the right manner to result in effective aerosol
formation, otherwise aerosols are quickly rained out. There are gaps in understanding of
aerosol processes e.g. the effect on stratospheric climate and on rainfall patterns. It is
difficult to deliver aerosols evenly around the globe. Reduction of total incoming solar
radiation could decrease terrestrial CO2 sinks as a consequence of decreased plant
productivity by decreased insolation. Aerosols may cause stratospheric ozone depletion,
increasing UV irradiance, which is deleterious to ecosystems..
SRM needs to be performed as long as CO2 levels are elevated. Stopping SRM while CO2
concentrations are still high would lead to a very rapid rewarming (see IPCC AR5 FAQ7.3,
Figure 2),
30

31. Is fixing the climate crisis affordable?
 The cost of emission cuts consist of the reconversion of fossil energy into low-carbon
energy facilities. Most cost estimates are cost-benefit analysis (CBA) studies. IPCC reported
that CBAs differ by range from slightly negative to 4% of global GDP, depending on the
assumptions made in the different studies and the climate policy model used. The cost, in
terms of global carbon price, is in the range of US$ 20–80 billion/gigaton CO2-equivalent by
2030 (US$ 0.8-3 trillion). At this price it could realize a greenhouse gas stabilization at
approximately 550 ppm CO2-equivalent by 2100, but this is still too high to guarantee a safe
climate. As a comparison: the war in Iraq had a cost of US$ 3 trillion to the U.S. alone and
OECD countries have invested more than US$ 2 trillion to stabilize the financial system
after the 2008 crisis.
 As to climate change adaptation, the United Nations Development Programme estimated
that US$ 86 billion per year would be needed in 2015.[Ref] According to UNFCCC
adaptation to climate change would cost US$ 49–171 billion per year globally by 2030, a
doubling of current official development assistance (ODA). A World Bank study found a cost
in the range of US$ 75–100 billion per year between 2010 and 2050.
 An important matter here is that funding should not come from cutting aid to other important
Millennium Development Goals.[Ref] An "optimal" balance of the costs and benefits needs to
be found between climate change impacts, adaptation, and emission cuts, which is a
difficult task as there are uncertainties both in the cost estimates and in the severity of
climate impacts.
31

32.  IPCC AR4 WG2 concluded with very high confidence that in the absence of carbon
emission cuts efforts, the effects of climate change would reach such a magnitude as to
make adaptation impossible for certain natural ecosystems.[Ref] For human systems, the
economic and social costs of unmitigated climate change would be very high.
 Read more here, here and here
32

33. Look at other climate change mitigation
slides
•
33