Climate Insider’s Post

A new CAST briefing paper centred on researchers' perceptions of climate action in UK universities, is now live on our website, led by CAST's Briony Latter, Dr Christina Demski and Dr Stuart Capstick 📣       Almost 2,000 researchers from 127 UK universities across disciplines and career stages were surveyed on what they think about universities' climate action, their own role in this, and research culture/practices.     Key findings from the research include:    💪 Researchers want to take climate action - almost all researchers want to do more in their roles to address climate change. ❌ Researchers think research culture, processes and guidance need to change - most researchers think funding processes do not incentivise low-carbon approaches to research and their university does not provide them with information about how to conduct low-carbon research. 🤝 Researchers need support in overcoming multiple barriers to taking climate action - key barriers relate to personal knowledge (uncertainty about what actions to take) and cultural and practical issues (high workload, lack of power). 🚧 The barriers can be overcome in multiple ways - researchers would address climate change through their roles if they knew what actions to take, and had more institutional support and greater capacity. Read the full briefing: https://lnkd.in/ekiDJCvp    Read the journal article published in PLOS Climate: https://lnkd.in/dHCTuAeN    #ClimateAction #UKUniversities

The climate policy paradigm has moved from a doom-and-gloom view, where economic growth isn't possible, to a more constructive model in which growth and a sustainable environment can coexist. With this, the focus of climate policy has expanded to include not only the costs of the energy transition but also opportunities for innovation and growth. Read our S&P Global Ratings article to learn more: https://ow.ly/coTs50QYnlx

Amazing what word salad nonsense passes for "Climate Science" these days. This victim-mentality Climate Change psychobabble is amusingly horrifying to read, published on a supposedly "hard science" website called Phys.Org. Was this article cobbled together by an AI which was programmed by far left green unicorn believers? Some of the bizarre far left pseudo-science disinformation presented in the article: "dimensions of justice for the climate domain in an interdisciplinary context." "Their innovative framework synthesizes distributional, procedural, corrective, recognitional, and transitional justice that can be used by scientists and policymakers." "improve clarity by using terminology from justice scholarship" "a more holistic and multidimensional understanding of justice in the context of climate change" ==================== "How can climate policy be made more just and fair? International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) researchers have synthesized different dimensions of justice into a framework that can be used by climate scientists and policymakers, explaining how previous research has neglected many potential justice positions and how these can be implemented in policy contexts. ●》Dealing with climate change is not just about the environment - it is also about justice and fairness. This includes how we transition to cleaner ways of living, the different impacts on various groups of people, and who is responsible for what. Paying more attention to fairness and justice when making decisions will help policymakers devise better climate policies that people can agree on. ... ●》In their new paper published in Nature Climate Change, IIASA researchers propose a conceptual framework rooted in philosophical theory to address this gap in possibly the first systematic attempt to describe these different aspects or dimensions of justice for the climate domain in an interdisciplinary context. ●》Their innovative framework synthesizes distributional, procedural, corrective, recognitional, and transitional justice that can be used by scientists and policymakers. ... "This framework aims to achieve three goals: - improve clarity by using terminology from justice scholarship; - promote awareness and consistency in examining justice concerns as part of a coherent whole; and - enhance comparability across scenarios and modeling contexts, to facilitate discussions on these issues," explains IIASA researcher Caroline Zimm, one of the study lead authors. ... This will raise awareness about the possibilities and limitations regarding justice considerations in these scenarios and enhance transparency," ... ●》This pioneering work is a significant step toward a more holistic and multidimensional understanding of justice in the context of climate change, offering a valuable tool to advance climate policy and research worldwide." https://lnkd.in/gJKDWzPe

One of the most painful learnings in my professional life was the discovery that human beings are not primarily driven by evidence and logic: we are complex, contradictory and contrary creatures. This is particularly evident in the environmental field, and explains why STEM skills (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) alone are failing to steer our planetary trajectory towards sustainability. For over ten years I have been following the World Economic Forum’s annual risk reports. These have always identified climate change as a significant risk to the global economy; and for most of those years, the Forum has framed the risk not as climate change per se, but as a “failure of climate change governance”. That is, it’s a failure by us, as complex, contradictory and contrary humans, to take appropriate collective action Informed by the climate change evidence that is now piling up into people's everyday experiences. That's why we need STEAM skills: science technology, engineering, ARTS and mathematics. Acclaimed Australian author Tim Winton’s latest novel, Juice, says it all. This dystopian, but very human, novel is placed in a future that climate change has rendered unbearable for human beings. It takes a work of fiction to show us what is already happening and unpack the inevitable consequences in a way that accesses our emotional drivers, which for most of us are far more powerful than our rational drivers. Do listen to the entire 33-minute RNZ interview - there are pearls of wisdom throughout. “What we do now in the next six or seven years will probably determine the fate of the earth and for those who come after us… It's hard to know which way we're going to go. My fervent hope and belief is that we will find ourselves, that we will do the right thing." - Tim Winton https://lnkd.in/g2cbaKsm #climatechange #risk #globaleconomy #STEM #STEAM #governance Water New Zealand Carbon and Energy Professionals New Zealand WasteMINZ Civil Contractors New Zealand Engineering New Zealand Te Ao Rangahau ACE New Zealand Āpōpō Climate Leaders Coalition Infrastructure Sustainability Council (ISC) Climate Change Commission Ministry for the Environment | Manatū mō te Taiao Norman Smith Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment - University of Oxford Bruce Greenwald Columbia Business School Niki Harre Dr Melanie Feeney Jarrod Ormiston James Reddish Sue Ira Ganesh Ahirao Jacinda Ardern Mark Carney Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment Coalition of Finance Ministers for Climate Action James Hughes Jonathan Reed James Shaw Wellbeing Economy Alliance - WEAll

I will be editing this special issue and if you work on the issue of climate change and economic justice from the perspective of the global south, please consider submitting your research article. *𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡: 𝐆𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐄𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬* 𝘋𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘶𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵: 15 𝘚𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 2024 𝘑𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭: 𝘋𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 While we have a broad understanding of how to combat climate change – such as promoting low-carbon solutions, transitioning away from fossil fuels, and reducing overconsumption – we still grapple with the challenge of achieving economic prosperity and sustaining livelihoods in the Global South while decarbonising our planet. The delicate balance between economic development justice and the imperative to reduce carbon emissions sparks intense academic debates, yet practical solutions remain elusive. This special issue brings together original research that addresses interdisciplinary issues that emerge from and around global climate action. We welcome experts, authors, as well as young scholars, to discuss how the impacts of climate action intersect with existing "Southern" systems and conditions to affect many people, places, and institutions. The editors of this special issue are also convening a panel (P32: Approaching climate complexities in the south: Global climate action and its actual effects) at Development Studies Association (DSA) 2024. DSA 2024 Conference will take place at SOAS University of London, 26–28 June 2024. We welcome you to attend our panel.

Nearly two-thirds of people expect global research universities to come up with new innovations that will help to reduce the effects of climate change but what is not as easy to survey is why funding for foundational research into greenhouse gas removal is lagging. Our Head of Research Programmes Luke Williams explains "What cannot be captured in a poll like this is the scale required and whilst research can certainly realise the breakthroughs and innovations needed, this cannot happen in a vacuum or without funding for early stage foundational work." Public First carried out a survey of 2,000 UK adults on behalf of University of Cambridge. Findings demonstrate just how important the public believe research universities are in the fight against climate change, developing innovations to head off the looming climate and nature crises.  The poll results showed that the public thinks the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (38%), alongside the development of alternative fuels for cars and aircraft (37%) and better batteries (30%) that store larger amounts of energy are the most pressing problems. https://lnkd.in/ed_jGdhx

Recently, I had the pleasure of attending a UU talks event at Utrecht University. It was hosted by Twan Huys, and the esteemed 2024 Stevin & Spinoza prize winners, Paul 't Hart and Detlef Van Vuuren. Paul 't Hart, a professor at the Utrecht University School of Governance, is an expert in public administration and political science. Detlef van Vuuren, professor at the Faculty of Geosciences' Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, is a leading researcher in environmental sciences and sustainable development. The discussions were timely, focusing on navigating governance in times of the climate crisis, the leading work of the EU in sustainable development, and the role of democracy in a new era of climate governance. The conversation was certainly enlightening and after reflecting on the ideas shared, one of the most crucial takeaways for me was the vital role that science communication plays, not only guiding policy-making, but in the engagement and education of the public in conversations about the climate crisis. An interesting point that was brought up by one of the students was the challenging of democracy as a system where climate change mitigation policies can be effectively developed and executed, specially as the climate crisis calls for rapid and efficient action. The concept of an authoritarian-like regime governing in the name of planetary wellbeing and sustainability was introduced and subsequently challenged by the speakers. The key takeaway was the importance of protecting democracy. Specially because, as Professor Paul elucidated during the talk, and Churchill one said “Democracy the worst form of government, except for all the others". In my opinion, effective climate crisis management is possible within a democratic system if we are able to bridge the gap between science, governance and the public. The view of science as something elitist and removed from everyday realities is harmful and can foster skepticism and mistrust. Hence, science needs to be more approachable and relatable, and thats where the role of media communication comes in. I believe the role of the media in shaping the public's understanding of science and policy cannot be ignored. In an age of increasing polarization, the media can either facilitate public understanding or exacerbate divisions, and unfortunately the latter is what we are currently seeing. A more responsible and fact-based approach is necessary to foster consensus on urgent issues like climate change, rather than deepening divides. Lastly, there is a necessity for uniform global cooperation in the renewable energy transition. It is essential to ensure that these advancements benefit all regions of the world and parts of society. Ensuring equally shared costs and benefits is needed to reduce the growing injustice and disparity.

Fascinating to attend this University of Nottingham panel discussion last night on ‘Securing a Sustainable Future: Net Zero in a Volatile World’. I loved having an evening of thought-provoking discussion. And the subject matter took me right back to my years at Department for Energy Security and Net Zero working on the energy system and climate strategy. Strange in some ways to reflect how little of the discussion has changed in 9 years. The geopolitics and role of information seem like the key differences, and some promising technological steps too. Really enjoyable to step back into that world more fully, if sobering (but not hopeless) in its conclusions. The three speakers were excellent: Sir John Sawers (ex diplomat and intelligence officer), Steve Holliday (ex National Grid CEO), and Professor Lucelia Rodrigues. Lots of interesting discussion around: ·      The influence of geopolitics on international climate negotiations and changing styles, moving from collaborative to competitive international approaches. ·      Acknowledging the huge increase in power required, as we electrify more of our energy demand, and how we are still not seeing the reductions in energy demand that were forecast - or required - to stay under 1.5 degrees of warming. ·      The timeframes of implementation: looking at the role of the planning system, and innovation. Why it’s taken so long in the UK to install new energy infrastructure, and why we need to keep investing in a range of what may be ‘far off’ technologies now, in case needed later. ·      The ongoing challenge of getting energy efficiency measures implemented, despite them being considered ‘low hanging fruit’, i.e. easy and cheap. ·      The way that China now dominates energy technology production, and what that might mean internationally. ·      The different priorities in an unjust world, with many people focused on meeting immediate needs of shelter and food, and of coping with the impacts of climate change, while wealthier nations/communities focus on mitigation and carbon reduction. ·      The relative merits of centralised power and local distributed energy, the potential of these different types of energy to meet the changing energy needs, and the varying vulnerability and resilience. Thanks for the invitation Laurie Spears.

In the evolving landscape of climate tech, women researchers and innovators are leading the charge, driving essential developments to address global climate challenges. Their contributions span diverse fields—from renewable energy advancements to AI-driven climate modeling—turning complex data into impactful solutions. These leaders are crafting tools that policymakers, businesses, and communities rely on for informed, effective action. 🌍 👩🔬 💡 Here are 15 women leading climate tech research that you should know of in 2024: 👉 Dr. Katharine Hayhoe, Chief Scientist at The Nature Conservancy. 👉 Dr. Erica Smithwick, Distinguished Professor at Penn State University. 👉 Dr. Lisa Patel, Executive Director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate and Health. 👉 Dr. Claudia Benitez-Nelson, Associate Dean at the University of South Carolina. 👉 Dr. Joellen Russell, Distinguished Chair of Integrative Science at the University of Arizona. 👉 Dr. Sierra Peterson, Professor at the University of Michigan. 👉  Dr. Tracey Holloway, Professor of Energy Analysis at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 👉 Dr. Tamara Jane Zelikova, Chief Scientist at Carbon180. 👉 Dr. Jessika Trancik, Professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 👉 Dr. Leah Stokes, Associate Professor at UC Santa Barbara. 👉 Dr. Katharine Mach, Associate Professor at the University of Miami. 👉 Dr. Emily Shuckburgh, Director of Cambridge Zero. 👉  Dr. Valérie Masson-Delmotte, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group I. 👉 Dr. Nilda Mesa, Director at Columbia University's Urban Design Lab. 👉 Dr. Kristie Ebi, Professor of Global Health at the University of Washington. #ClimateTech #WomenInScience #SustainabilityLeaders #ClimateAction #EnvironmentalResearch #CleanEnergy #ClimateAdaptation #SustainableFuture #ClimateChangeSolutions #WomenInSTEM #GlobalHealth #ClimateResilience #GreenInnovation #Decarbonization #ClimatePolicy

Really interesting piece of research issued by Oxford University in August that deserves a repost now that summer holidays are over and we are all "back to school". Fascinating to see the direct link drawn between the implicit carbon removals of net zero promises and to kick off the discussion on measurement. A lot of complexity in the modelling for sure, but a budget is a great way to think about how to allocate a scarce resource, be it the traditional financial budgeting or as here carbon. Of course, decarbonisation pathways are rightly prioritised today to reduce national and corporate requirements, but there is NO Net Zero Carbon without removal of the residual. I recommend a read of the detailed paper to anyone with more than a passing interest in carbon cycles and removals.