World leaders met in Egypt this November for the 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27) climate summit. A major topic that was discussed is one that has been up for debate for some time: should we continue to strive for the 1.5 degrees Celsius target?
The 1.5 degrees Celsius target comes from the 2015 Paris climate summit, which set a goal for the increase in global temperatures to remain below an increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial times. Climate scientists estimate that warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius would cause severe climate anomalies and events that may affect millions of people, whereas remaining under 1.5 degrees Celsius would prevent many of these adverse effects. Compare this to a global temperature increase of two degrees Celsius, which scientists estimate would become so severe that hundreds of millions of people will be affected and may need to flee their homes.
As of the writing of this article, 1.5 degrees Celsius was also a target of the Egypt summit. Currently, the world has warmed by 1.2 degrees. Even with this amount of warming, we are seeing major climate events such as Hurricane Ian, which was one of the most destructive storms in the history of the United States. The problem with 1.5 degrees Celsius is that it would require us to diversify our economies and stop using fossil fuels rapidly. Climate change has been ignored for too long in our world, and if we are to reach that crucial target, a lot of work needs to be done. However, many experts now believe the goal of keeping global temperature increases below 1.5 degrees Celsius is unfeasible and should be abandoned, as a swift change in global fuel use is unlikely to happen and may be inadequate to stop environmental consequences. Some estimates show that current emissions and their environmental impacts have already done enough harm that even if the world stopped all carbon emissions now, global temperatures would still increase over 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Proponents of changing the target from 1.5 to two degrees argue that it is more realistic and, therefore, more helpful. However, there is a danger in changing the target. Allowing the issue to seem less urgent than it is will only serve to delay necessary actions that we must take quickly. This is why 1.5 degrees Celsius should be a target that we set and take steps to attempt to reach. Even if we do not reach that target, we can keep warming under the more severe two degrees Celsius mark. While realism is necessary, it is crucial to keep pressure on world governments to take action on climate change—even if it is against their immediate economic interest. We must live with the consequences of our efforts during this turning point regarding the global climate, and everyone should care about it, regardless of age. As the late Queen Elizabeth II said during the last climate summit held in Glasgow, “The benefits of such actions will not be there for all of us to enjoy here today…we are doing this not for ourselves, but for our children and our children’s children, and those who will follow in their footsteps.”