SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The worst-case outcomes of an unmitigated climate emergency--civilizational collapse or even human extinction--are "dangerously underexplored" scenarios requiring further study, an analysis published Monday asserted.
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming."
In a perspective published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, climate scientists Luke Kemp, Chi Xu, Joanna Depledge, and Timothy M. Lenton argue that humanity must prepare for what they call the "climate endgame."
"It is time for the scientific community to grapple with the challenge of better understanding catastrophic climate change," the researchers write.
Although climate scientists say such catastrophic consequences are unlikely, the paper's authors caution that "facing a future of accelerating climate change while blind to worst-case scenarios is naive risk management at best and fatally foolish at worst."
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming," they warn. "Understanding extreme risks is important for robust decision-making, from preparation to consideration of emergency responses."
"This requires exploring not just higher temperature scenarios but also the potential for climate change impacts to contribute to systemic risk and other cascades," the authors add. "We suggest that it is time to seriously scrutinize the best way to expand our research horizons to cover this field."
\u201cNew paper from @LukaKemp in PNAS 'Climate Endgame: Exploring catastrophic climate change scenarios' https://t.co/MihpWqUF8s\u201d— Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (@Centre for the Study of Existential Risk) 1659390533
The scientists propose a research agenda that seeks to answer four main questions:
"Knowing the worst cases can compel action, as the idea of 'nuclear winter' in 1983 galvanized public concern and nuclear disarmament efforts," the analysis states. "Exploring severe risks and higher-temperature scenarios could cement a recommitment to the 1.5 degC to 2 degC guardrail" that the Paris climate agreement says is imperative to avoid an irreversible climate catastrophe.
"I think it's sane risk management to think about the plausible worst-case scenarios and we do it when it comes to every other situation, we should definitely do when it comes to the fate of the planet and species," study lead author Luke Kemp, a researcher at the University of Cambridge in England, told the BBC.
\u201cNew paper in PNAS on worst-case climate change\n\nI think we have to clearly communicate risks and also say: We still have it in our hands. We have the technologies, we know the policies. It is cheaper and necessary to immediately act on climate change.\n https://t.co/Gu5CDqFobh\u201d— Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne (@Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne) 1659386655
In a separate interview with The Guardian, Kemp said that "paths to disaster are not limited to the direct impacts of high temperatures, such as extreme weather events. Knock-on effects such as financial crises, conflict, and new disease outbreaks could trigger other calamities."
Study co-author Xu of Nanjing University in China told the BBC that "average annual temperatures of 29degC currently affect around 30 million people in the Sahara and Gulf Coast."
"By 2070, these temperatures and the social and political consequences will directly affect two nuclear powers, and seven maximum containment laboratories housing the most dangerous pathogens," he added. "There is serious potential for disastrous knock-on effects."
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
The worst-case outcomes of an unmitigated climate emergency--civilizational collapse or even human extinction--are "dangerously underexplored" scenarios requiring further study, an analysis published Monday asserted.
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming."
In a perspective published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, climate scientists Luke Kemp, Chi Xu, Joanna Depledge, and Timothy M. Lenton argue that humanity must prepare for what they call the "climate endgame."
"It is time for the scientific community to grapple with the challenge of better understanding catastrophic climate change," the researchers write.
Although climate scientists say such catastrophic consequences are unlikely, the paper's authors caution that "facing a future of accelerating climate change while blind to worst-case scenarios is naive risk management at best and fatally foolish at worst."
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming," they warn. "Understanding extreme risks is important for robust decision-making, from preparation to consideration of emergency responses."
"This requires exploring not just higher temperature scenarios but also the potential for climate change impacts to contribute to systemic risk and other cascades," the authors add. "We suggest that it is time to seriously scrutinize the best way to expand our research horizons to cover this field."
\u201cNew paper from @LukaKemp in PNAS 'Climate Endgame: Exploring catastrophic climate change scenarios' https://t.co/MihpWqUF8s\u201d— Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (@Centre for the Study of Existential Risk) 1659390533
The scientists propose a research agenda that seeks to answer four main questions:
"Knowing the worst cases can compel action, as the idea of 'nuclear winter' in 1983 galvanized public concern and nuclear disarmament efforts," the analysis states. "Exploring severe risks and higher-temperature scenarios could cement a recommitment to the 1.5 degC to 2 degC guardrail" that the Paris climate agreement says is imperative to avoid an irreversible climate catastrophe.
"I think it's sane risk management to think about the plausible worst-case scenarios and we do it when it comes to every other situation, we should definitely do when it comes to the fate of the planet and species," study lead author Luke Kemp, a researcher at the University of Cambridge in England, told the BBC.
\u201cNew paper in PNAS on worst-case climate change\n\nI think we have to clearly communicate risks and also say: We still have it in our hands. We have the technologies, we know the policies. It is cheaper and necessary to immediately act on climate change.\n https://t.co/Gu5CDqFobh\u201d— Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne (@Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne) 1659386655
In a separate interview with The Guardian, Kemp said that "paths to disaster are not limited to the direct impacts of high temperatures, such as extreme weather events. Knock-on effects such as financial crises, conflict, and new disease outbreaks could trigger other calamities."
Study co-author Xu of Nanjing University in China told the BBC that "average annual temperatures of 29degC currently affect around 30 million people in the Sahara and Gulf Coast."
"By 2070, these temperatures and the social and political consequences will directly affect two nuclear powers, and seven maximum containment laboratories housing the most dangerous pathogens," he added. "There is serious potential for disastrous knock-on effects."
The worst-case outcomes of an unmitigated climate emergency--civilizational collapse or even human extinction--are "dangerously underexplored" scenarios requiring further study, an analysis published Monday asserted.
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming."
In a perspective published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, climate scientists Luke Kemp, Chi Xu, Joanna Depledge, and Timothy M. Lenton argue that humanity must prepare for what they call the "climate endgame."
"It is time for the scientific community to grapple with the challenge of better understanding catastrophic climate change," the researchers write.
Although climate scientists say such catastrophic consequences are unlikely, the paper's authors caution that "facing a future of accelerating climate change while blind to worst-case scenarios is naive risk management at best and fatally foolish at worst."
"There is ample evidence that climate change could become catastrophic. We could enter such 'endgames' at even modest levels of warming," they warn. "Understanding extreme risks is important for robust decision-making, from preparation to consideration of emergency responses."
"This requires exploring not just higher temperature scenarios but also the potential for climate change impacts to contribute to systemic risk and other cascades," the authors add. "We suggest that it is time to seriously scrutinize the best way to expand our research horizons to cover this field."
\u201cNew paper from @LukaKemp in PNAS 'Climate Endgame: Exploring catastrophic climate change scenarios' https://t.co/MihpWqUF8s\u201d— Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (@Centre for the Study of Existential Risk) 1659390533
The scientists propose a research agenda that seeks to answer four main questions:
"Knowing the worst cases can compel action, as the idea of 'nuclear winter' in 1983 galvanized public concern and nuclear disarmament efforts," the analysis states. "Exploring severe risks and higher-temperature scenarios could cement a recommitment to the 1.5 degC to 2 degC guardrail" that the Paris climate agreement says is imperative to avoid an irreversible climate catastrophe.
"I think it's sane risk management to think about the plausible worst-case scenarios and we do it when it comes to every other situation, we should definitely do when it comes to the fate of the planet and species," study lead author Luke Kemp, a researcher at the University of Cambridge in England, told the BBC.
\u201cNew paper in PNAS on worst-case climate change\n\nI think we have to clearly communicate risks and also say: We still have it in our hands. We have the technologies, we know the policies. It is cheaper and necessary to immediately act on climate change.\n https://t.co/Gu5CDqFobh\u201d— Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne (@Prof. Niklas H\u00f6hne) 1659386655
In a separate interview with The Guardian, Kemp said that "paths to disaster are not limited to the direct impacts of high temperatures, such as extreme weather events. Knock-on effects such as financial crises, conflict, and new disease outbreaks could trigger other calamities."
Study co-author Xu of Nanjing University in China told the BBC that "average annual temperatures of 29degC currently affect around 30 million people in the Sahara and Gulf Coast."
"By 2070, these temperatures and the social and political consequences will directly affect two nuclear powers, and seven maximum containment laboratories housing the most dangerous pathogens," he added. "There is serious potential for disastrous knock-on effects."