Radical change urged over 20 years to attain climate goals -institute

OSLO, (Reuters) – The world will need sweeping
changes over the next 20 years ranging from energy use to food
production to achieve climate goals set by almost 200 nations,
the new heads of a top environmental think-tank said on Friday.

Both said “revolutions” were needed to tackle climate
change, such as capturing greenhouse gas emissions from power
plants that burn fossil fuels or by reforming agriculture, where
meat production and fertilisers are big sources of greenhouse

Developed nations should set an example, such as Germany

where Chancellor Angela Merkel is under pressure to end the use
of coal in power generation.

“When Germany is not in a position to phase out coal can we
expect that Poland or Indonesia or Vietnam or Turkey … can
phase out coal?” Ottmar Edenhofer, new co-director of the
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, told Reuters.

Edenhofer, formerly the institute’s chief economist, and new
co-director Johan Rockstrom, a Swedish scientist, said
governments were far from achieving the core goal in the 2015
Paris Agreement of limiting a rise in global average
temperatures to “well below” two degrees Celsius (3.6
Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times.

“We have just literally 20 years to either succeed or fail”
in the goals of getting the planet on a more sustainable path,
Rockstrom said in a joint telephone interview.

The University of Pennsylvania rated the Potsdam Institute
as the world’s top environment policy think-tank this month.

The institute plans to exploit more data to try to grasp
under-appreciated long-term harm from natural disasters linked

to climate change such as floods, droughts or storms.

Poor families in developing nations often focus, for
instance, on rebuilding their homes after a natural disaster but
sometimes stopped sending their children to school even after
reconstruction, Edenhofer said.

The institute could use more satellite data, for instance
the amount of light emitted at night by villages in developing
nations, as a gauge of local poverty and vulnerability, he said.
The poorest have the least access to electricity.

Rockstrom and Edenhofer were named by the institute on
Friday to succeed Hans Joachim Schellnhuber in October.

About the author


  • bufford54

    Was there any mention of a goal in limiting global population growth? The real cause of all pollution world wide.

  • Monkeeworks

    Every month there is a new prediction on climate change, no longer called global warming. Climate Change also now covers cooling. This article cites two peoples new predictions. Every prediction, from anyone on climate change, every one of them, has been a false alarm. 250ppm co2 and we are dead. 300 ppm same thing, UN’s IPCC, “if we pass 350 we are finished”. Well we are well over 400 and still kicking. (time frame now expanded, whew! numbers are out climbing predictions so change to years.) The IPCC is slowly changing their version of just what the end is. ‘The Pause’ the earths warming did not follow a single climate change model. Not a one! What the climate alarmists screamed about yesterday is old hat today. Al Gore’s theories are down the toilet but made him hundreds of millions of dollars. Graphs are taken apart and put into real categories of time to be shown as ‘give me numbers, I will show you what you want to see’. Solar panels, our saviour from ourselves, put pollutants into the atmosphere 1200 times worse than co2 that last 5 to 7 hundred years up there in their construction (nitrogen trifluoride). The UN and their IPCC are disregarding any proof, yes, real proof that does not fit into their climate models and they tell us that they are disregarding it. Climate Gate.
    This is just going on and on and on. How many chicken littles are there out here anyway? How many times do we hear ‘wolf’ before we say, hey, enough is enough. If you don’t know what you are talking about then go back to the board and figure it out before you release a bunch of half ideas that evaporate faster than water on the sun. I am really tired of dodging the falling sky.
    We all know the climate is changing. No one is arguing it is not. If it didn’t change the earth would still be a roiling ball of molten rock. Ice ages come and go. Draughts come and go. Some winters have lasted years, sometimes we don’t have winters.
    When someone that is 600 years old can come forward and say, “I remember when” then it is something to listen to. A single life span of a human is no way to measure climate change. The earth changes it’s climate over lifetimes of a human and today we have modern research showing for a measly 100 years, maybe. The past climate is already known. The earth is over 5 billion years old. It has seen everything happening to us today many times over. We are babies experiencing things for the first time believing we are the first to see it.

    • Harold

      I agree with you and I can further say that It is easy to fall into the trappings of climate change and all of its hysteria, because as always, a perceived fear creates unity amongst people and in that fear they are open minded to the indoctrination coming from their perceived savior, and in following their savior, they believe that they are part of a group much larger and more powerful than themselves; a comfort in the face of fear; real or not. Those without fear are viewed as Anti–savior or worse: the anti-Christ. In this case, man will combat a future climate as successfully as we have combated all past climate no less, which in its face is the absolute illusion of a fool, unless of course, a politicized science can be used to blame now and future time mankind. The policy of fear – if bought – comes with it the public’s willingness to accept the burden of more taxation and more restrictive and costly regulations and more costly government and more government control over more of the aspects of the public and their lives, but let’s not forget that the government right now is the mindset of drama teacher Justin Trudeau and the minds of his Liberal party and that our last savior was Harper and his Conservatives. Without fear, we in the public would not be so stupid and this leads to the adage; fear, fear itself.
      Tremendous sheets of Ice covered Canada and suddenly melted exposing what is now Canada and it was due to climate change and that water was displaced elsewhere into the environment. Man could not have prevented this occurrence then and will not be able to control the same melting if it were to happen again. The stupidity of future time climate models is the concept that climate is stable and therefore is a mean in which manmade increases to global temperatures can now be measurable. In the past, Al Gore, backed with science, predicted the catastrophic events of global warming in the year that we now live in and in every single prediction – he and science is proven wrong; in fact, stupidly wrong. The stupidity of this concept is more than obvious and Al Gore, like any minister of the faith, cannot feel any personal shame for misguiding the public of the past, and therefore empty handed keeps preaching the same faith in future time catastrophic fiction delighting in mother nature handing to him the catastrophe that he is seeking in order to be proven right. It should be noted that during Al Gore’s illusionary time in the 80’s that there was not anyone who stood up to say that Al Gore was incorrect and delusional. Where were those “brilliant” scientific minds? I can say that we have the same “brilliant” minds in the sciences of today and as of what was then, all bought and paid for and all just as silent. If the Ice age of itself was a catastrophic event, why do we believe that its melting is also a catastrophic event? The forest restores itself after the catastrophic event of a fire but the earth does not restore itself after any other catastrophic event? Co2 is plant food and not a poison to be taxed and taxing Co2 is as stupid as taxing humans for every breath that they exhale. I think that God already thought about Co2 more than 5 billion years ago. There are more than 31,000 scientists (6000 PhD) who say that the climate is changing but say that the manmade climate change is a hoax and in this era of information it is inexcusable that the public does not allow them a hearing. I can only say that allowing these scientists to speak comes with it the risk of losing one’s glorious fear and in so doing they don’t get to save the planet alongside the prophets of doom, gloom, and fear. Yes, with the loss of fear the lyrics of the song will change; your wife or husband comes home, your dog comes home, your ford starts, freedom returns, and there is more money in your pockets.

  • Garrett Osborn

    Is climate stability possible? I am more concerned of a volcanic event that would interfere with solar radiation reaching the earth’s surface…inhibiting plant growth (& solar panel production) & setting conditions for global cooling in a very short time frame. Can that event be mitigated in a short time frame on the scale required?


Stories from our other publications