Image: IPCC
Sixth Assessment Report 2021-22
“I’ve seen many scientific reports in my time but nothing like this. Today’s IPCC report is an atlas of human suffering and the damning indictment of failed climate leadership. This report reveals that all people on the planet are getting clobbered by climate change. Nearly half of humanity is living in the danger zone. Now. Many ecosystems are at the point of no return. Now. And unchecked carbon pollution is forcing the globe’s most vulnerable on a frog march to destruction. Now. The facts are undeniable. This abdication of leadership is criminal.” – António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations introduction to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
Background
Back in 1988 when it was clear that the world’s climate was changing, it was also evident that every aspect of life on Earth would be affected. The IPCC was formed to gather research from around the world, evaluate it, and use it to make predications about the impacts, with the objective of ‘stablising greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human-induced) interference with the climate system‘. By gathering research from across all sectors, the IPCC is also able to see where there are gaps in knowledge, which in turn helped direct research.
Each of the six Assessment Reports published since 1988 runs into several million words, are in several parts, and collated over four to five years by scientists and researchers nominated by their respective governments (Fig. 2). This process ensures that:
- All member nations are represented
- There is time to include all relevant material
- A consensus is reached by all nations prior to each Assessment Report being released
Thousands of scientists and other experts around the world volunteer their time to write and review the draft reports. As these are long and technical to ensure the research is robust and comprehensive, there is also a summary report for policymakers. Delegates from all participating governments—around 120 including New Zealand—check the summary report line-by-line, and all countries have to agree on the wording before the final report is published.
The Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) is in three parts authored by working groups (WG):
- August 2021: AR6 WG1 The physical Science
- February 2022: AR6 WG2 Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
- April 2022: AR6 WG3 Mitigation of Climate Change
Criticisms of reports being too conservative
Some assumptions in the first five assessment cycles (AR1-5) have not come to pass. These assumptions were primarily that:
- Once governments knew the problems that climate change would bring, they would act quickly to replace fossil fuels. This is failing.
- Carbon capture technologies would be invented and installed to remove excess greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. The technology exists but is not cost effective and most tech sells the CO2 as fuel, returning it back into the atmosphere.
Some nations still reject aspects of the science and implications of climate change, insisting on language in the summary reports downplay the scale and urgency of the problems. As few policy makers read more than the summary reports, the nuances are often lost or overlooked.
Supporting evidence: It takes years to gather robust data, write research papers and have that research published. Consequently, some research in IPCC reports is more than a decade old. In research fields such as the process that lead to ice-caps melting, it was (and still is) an evolving field of science, and so summary reports did not include the potential of this to lead to rapid sea level rise, because it was an unknown. Hence, by the time IPCC reports are released, real-world events and discoveries have already taken place.
For example, IPCC predictions about sea level rise and temperatures regarded the ‘worst case scenario’ to be the ‘least likely’. On the eve of the Fourth Assessment Report a study was published showing that temperatures were at the top end of the worst predictions (blue-dotted line), and sea levels were rising much faster that the ‘worst case’ scenario (grey shaded area) (Fig. 3).
This problem of a lack of data and out-dated research is crucial, given that data in the 2013 Fifth Assessment Report used as the basis of the 2015 Paris Agreement to keep global temperatures under 1.5°C was itself based on research as much as 10 year old. AR6 WG1 The physical Science was catastrophic, and yet modelling of sea level rise still did not include rapid melting processes being observed in Greenland and Antarctica.