Climate change: Investors wants world energy body to support Paris accord.

The signatories said they wanted the IEA to produce what they would consider a "fully transparent" scenario showing how the world could meet the most ambitious Paris accord goals.

Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA), faced renewed pressure on Monday to overhaul the organisation's influential projections for fossil fuel demand from investors and scientists concerned about climate change.

Pension funds, insurers and large companies were among 65 signatories of a joint letter to Birol, seen by Reuters, urging him to do more to support the implementation of the 2015 Paris Agreement to avert catastrophic global warming.
"The year 2020 marks a turning point for the world - the year when we either grasp the challenges and opportunities before us, or continue delaying and obstructing the low-carbon transformation," the letter said.
The letter represented the first coordinated response by investors, scientists and campaigners pushing Birol to rethink the Paris-based organisation's flagship annual outlook since the latest edition was launched on Nov. 13.
Known as the World Energy Outlook, the document, which runs to hundreds of pages, helps shape expectations in financial markets over how quickly the world could transition from a fossil fuel-dominated energy system to cleaner sources of power.
Since the start of this year, various networks of institutional investors, asset owners, scientists and climate advocacy groups have been urging Birol to change the way the report is produced and presented.
These critics argue that a revised approach could help unlock faster investment in renewables and better identify possible risks to the value of oil, gas and coal companies posed by the prospect of rapid action to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The IEA made several changes to the last edition of the outlook, including providing what officials describe as a more "stringent" scenario showing how the world could fully achieve the goals of the Paris agreement than in the previous edition.
In interviews with Reuters this month, Birol and other senior IEA officials argued that the criticism of the outlook was misplaced, saying it was based on misunderstandings of how its scenarios work and what they aim to demonstrate.
Birol also emphasised that the IEA's wide-ranging work on topics from energy efficiency to offshore wind played an important role in boosting international efforts to tackle climate change.
Nevertheless, in the letter, sent on Monday, signatories described the new elements in the latest outlook as "minor improvements" that should not be mistaken for delivering "urgently needed substantial changes."
The signatories said they wanted the IEA to produce what they would consider a "fully transparent" scenario showing how the world could meet the most ambitious Paris accord goals.
That would include reliably limiting the rise in average global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times without banking on early stage technologies to suck carbon from the air, and reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2050.
The signatories want their vision for what would qualify as such a scenario to be the centrepiece of the next outlook.
German insurer Allianz, Switzerland's Zurich Insurance Group, and Danish fund PensionDanmark confirmed to Reuters they had signed the letter. Other signatories shown on a copy of the letter seen by Reuters included Unilever, IKEA, Nordea Life & Pension and Ørsted.
Climate scientists based in the United States, Britain and Germany, former U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres and Michelle Bachelet, U.N. high commissioner for human rights, also signed.
In a statement emailed to Reuters on Saturday, the IEA said it received a lot of comments on its work and carefully considered all suggestions.
"As science, technologies, markets, policies, and costs evolve each year, we take those changes into account in our analysis. We will do so again as we prepare for next year's edition of the World Energy Outlook," the IEA said. (Source: The business standard)


The above article can also be read using the link below:

Climate change: Investors wants world energy body to support Paris accord

Uttarakhand forest fires

Often unquantified, the social and economic impacts of forest fires are considerable: lives are lost, health problems occur, animals are killed and the environment suffers

The disaster:

Lives lost: 5

Land gutted by forest fire: Almost 1,600 acres of land (hundreds of villages/clusters)

Forest Fire in India:

Almost 50-55% of the total forest cover in India is prone to forest fire annually

Indian State of Forest Report, 2015: Tropical thorn forest, Tropical dry evergreen forest and Subtropical pine forest - most prone to forest fires

Period: Between February & mid-June

Why— Soil moisture is at its lowest

Himalayan Belt:

Western Himalayan region- moist deciduous, tropical dry deciduous, temperate and sub-Alpine types

Prone to fires owing to less rain in the pre-monsoon period

More susceptible trees: Pine forest in Garhwal & Kumaon Hills

Forest Fire & Ecology

The ground vegetation is completely destructed— severe loss of biodiversity

oLoss of forest cover

oLoss to the wildlife habitat

oLoss of human lives

Emissions of Carbon in the Atmosphere (Climate change - lack of sustainable land use policy)

Expansion of deforested area— Change in landscape & micro-climate—Drying up of forest floor

Fires in the understorey of humid rainforests can cause tree mortality and canopy openness (Land transforms into ''savannah'')

Major Issues related to Indian Forests:

Definition of Forest: No proper definition charted out with environmentalists and the government authorities having their own version of what exactly a forest is.

Greed for Land:

Increased industrial activity

Need to increase agricultural production

Nexus between land developers & Timber Mafia

Climate Change:

Natural Disasters: Volcanoes, Tsunamis, Earthquakes, Cloudbursts in Himalayas, Droughts, Storms

Mild winter: More pests and diseases (insect infestations)

The El-Niño effect: contributes to increases in the frequency of drought and lightning strikes

A recent study of various forest conditions in Russia suggests that a 2°C rise in temperature could increase the area affected by forest fires by a factor of between one and a half and two

India's Efforts:

Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDCs): Pledged to

Increase its forest cover and improve the quality of forest cover

Create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent through additional forests and tree cover by 2030

Technology used for monitoring:

Satellite images to detect forest fires and its spread (INFFRAS)

Mapping of fire-sensitive zones as well as real-time data

Pre & post fire guidelines/warnings

Firefighting Techniques:

Clearance of stretches of ground vegetation in between forest areas to arrest the spread of forest fire

Beating the fire with the help of local community with specified certain equipment's

Difficult to implement technique: Helicopters spraying water or carbon dioxide

Way Ahead:

The lack of regulatory enforcement and contradictory policies and laws need to be tamed in order to arrest the loss—ASEAN's Zero Burning Policy needs to be reformed and given more teeth in order to keep the trend in check

Rural community is a major stakeholder and government should involve its large rural communities in preparing for the future— by utilizing effective intervention of community-led ''van panchayats'' (forest councils) in preventing fires.

Usage of biomass alternatives, including cooking gas, has had a beneficial impact on fire risk, and this must be expanded

The plantation sector can be tapped for reducing the clearance of ecologically important natural oak forests, by giving preference to growing useful fodder and timber trees

Even 0.5°C more global warming can have big climate impacts

Even as more than 150 countries prepare to sign the Paris Agreement, research published in journal Earth System Dynamicshas shown that a global warming of 2°C will be substantially more devastating for the planet?s climate than 1.5°C by 2100. Researchers have found significant differences ''in impacts of 2°C and 1.5°C on water availability, agricultural yields, sea levels, extreme weather events and coral reefs.

While the Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 insists on a limit of 2°C and treats the 1.5°C-limit as desirable, the paper shows that limiting global average temperature to 2°C instead of 1.5°C would mean higher sea-level rises, longer heat waves, lower crop yields and all coral reefs being virtually obliterated.

An additional 0.5°C would result in a 50-cm-rise in global sea levels by 2100, 10 cm higher than under 1.5°C, the study says. Sea level rise will slow down during the 21st century only under a 1.5°C scenario,? explains the study's lead author, Carl Schleussner, a scientific advisor at Climate Analytics in Germany.

In a 2°C-scenario, freshwater availability in the Mediterranean region would be 17 per cent lower as against 9 per cent under 1.5°C. Crop yields in tropical regions such as Central America and West Africa would be twice as much lower in a 2°C world than in 1.5°C. Tropical regions are likely to fare worse if the rise in global average temperature is not kept under 1.5°C. Warm spells or heat waves in the region will last up to 50 per cent longer in a 2°C world than at 1.5°C, the study warns.

Almost all of the world's coral reefs could be severely degraded due to coral bleaching from the year 2050 under a global warming of 2°C. But limiting the global average temperature rise to under 1.5°C could reduce the extent to 70 per cent by 2100.

The researchers from Germany, Switzerland, Austria and the Netherlands analysed the climate models used in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)] Fifth Assessment Report to consider the impacts for 11 different indicators.

Effects of a 2°C limit over South Asia

Heat waves in the South Asian region will become longer in a 2°C scenario. ''Under 1.5°C, the longest annual warm spell would span about 1.5 month while under 2°C, this would rise to about 2.5 months. This indicates a substantial increase in risk of heat extremes in a region that is highly vulnerable to extreme heat,'' says Schleussner in an interview toDown To Earth.

He also hints at a possible intensification in extreme monsoon rainfall events, with a 10 per cent increase in extreme precipitation under 2°C than 7 per cent under 1.5 °C. South Asia will see the strongest increase in extreme rainfall events compared to other regions.

''Science is very clear that extreme weather events are increasing both in frequency and intensity and that a clear anthropogenic footprint is visible for most of the already observed changes. This is in particular the case for temperature related extremes,'' Schleussner says while explaining the reality of climate change. While he admits the role of natural variability and weather phenomena like El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) in extreme weather events, he states that climate change can ''affect monsoon patterns and ENSO and lead to more extreme ENSO events''.

As for risk to crop yields, Schleussner explains that if one excludes the positive effects of CO2 fertilisation on the growth of plants, the study finds that there will be a 15 to more than 20 per cent-reduction in yields for wheat, maize, rice and soy. This risk is lower—10-15 per cent—if global warming is kept under 1.5°C.

Is the 1.5°C target practical?

Developing countries are likely to bear the brunt of climate impacts due to global warming. African countries, Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)—all vulnerable nations—have backed the call for including the 1.5°C target in the Paris Agreement. While everyone seems to concur that achieving this target would be ideal,the agreement is devoid of elements that can place the world on a 1.5 °C trajectory.

If the world wants to raise the certainty of meeting this temperature goal to 66 per cent, then the carbon budget is a mere 400 Gt CO2, according to the Fifth Assessment report of IPCC (AR5). Butin a comparisondrawn by experts with the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) of countries, it becomes clear that the available carbon budget will be exhausted well before 2100. For instance, the US and the EU alone would consume 128 Gt CO2 between 2011 and 2030.

''The carbon space for a 1.5°C-target is so limited that developed countries will have to reach net zero emissions in the next five to 10 years,'' says a joint statement released by Chandra Bhushan, deputy director general, Centre for Science and Environment, and professors T Jayaraman of Tata Institute of Social Sciences and Anand Patwardhan of University of Maryland and IIT-Mumbai. ''Even for 2°C, the developed countries'' INDCs fall well short of their fair shares,'' it adds.

In addition to a fair and equitable distribution of the carbon budget, the experts call for significant increase in finance and technology support for developing countries.

Schleussner agrees that there will be an increase in adaptation needs between 1.5°C and 2°C and respective increases in finance needs for adaptation. He also asserts that achieving the 1.5°C target is physically and economically feasible. ''Limiting warming to below 1.5°C by 2100 requires similar transformations in the energy system as holding warming to below 2°C during the 21st century, but the decarbonisation of the energy system needs to be faster and more pronounced. Holding warming below 2°C also requires early and rapid action with the level of action in the next ten years (until around 2025) very similar to 1.5°C. By the 2030s, action towards 1.5°C needs to be faster than for 2°C,'' he says.