No time to waste ...

Eight years is not a long time. Eight years ago we were getting excited about the new millennium. Eight years away is less than two Olympic Games, two Presidential elections in the US and about three national election cycles in Australia.

These are the hard facts laid out in Six Degrees according to the science. So what are the ramifications if all this is right?

First, we have to start now on a global basis applying the urgency we would show and allocate the resources we would to a threat like, say, invasion from outer space. Dealing with it should become the driving principle behind global development for the foreseeable future.

Second, everyone needs to be brought on board. If the US, China, India or any other large emitters are not part of the solution, we cannot escape disaster.

Third, we will have to do all this with mostly existing technology. Eight years is just not enough time to develop radical new technologies on a large enough scale.

Fourth, nuclear power won’t do it. Leaving aside how much clean energy gain there actually is from nukes, again there is just not enough time to build the stations, let alone gather together the resources and expertise.

Fifth, the main effort will have to be in energy conservation. This can be done immediately and there is a huge capacity to do this with minimal economic harm.

Sixth, we will need to redistribute wealth internationally so as to bring in the poorer nations, and within nations so as to redirect resources. Taxation must shift up dramatically to pay for rebuilding infrastructure, training up the millions of technical experts we’ll need and preparing the health system for unavoidable costs of temperature rises already under way.

Seventh, the rich countries will have to cut emissions by much more than poorer countries. It is estimated that in order to keep to the 2C level, rich countries need to cut carbon dioxide levels by about 90 per cent by 2030.

Eighth, all of this can only be done if populations are politically and ideologically mobilised to participate fully. People need to be kept fully informed and actively brought into the response process. The time we have wasted already shows how little we can afford a mis-informed and apathetic populace.

As Lynas points out, the basic science is now established. The computer models improve all the time, but as they do the news only gets worse. The inherent complexity and scale of earth systems means that as new factors have been better understood, the probabilities of imminent and massive changes have increased.

As the recent ICCP report noted, the great unknown variables are climate-carbon cycle feedback and environmental sensitivity to systems disruption. Lynas argues that the science suggests these things are working against us in ways we are only just beginning to understand.

Some are already arguing that keeping temperature increases to 2C is politically impossible, and we should aim for 3C, or even 4C. But as Lynas makes clear, the core factor here is not human society but ongoing material processes, and those processes will likely not allow us to stabilise at more than 2C.

It is a tough ask, but we just have to get on and do it.