The sixth "summary report" of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), released this week, is still being reacted to. Commenting for the Financial Times, columnist Pilita Clark writes that it is "amazing how media coverage has changed since the fifth assessment". Clark writes: \u201cOn the day its first report appeared in 2013, one of the BBC's main news programs conducted a long interview with a climate skeptic about the finding that man was an 'extremely likely' main cause of 'unequivocally' global warming... Today it would was unimaginable.\u201d He continues: \u201cIt is sobering to consider how much climate policymaking and the IPCC itself have been affected by all the years when climate skepticism was mainstream.\u201d Clark concludes: \u201cThe IPCC's Policy Brief released this week does not hold back. He talks with bleak clarity about how the risk of tipping points, species extinctions and other disasters will increase as the planet warms. We have never been better informed about the future of the climate. Now we have to make up for all those lost years and try to make it livable.\u201d<\/p>\n
An editorial in India's Business Standard newspaper said: "Indian scientists who were part of the IPCC warned that the country faces the greatest risk from climate change - from heat waves and cyclones to urban and rural displacement." In an article titled "[n ]only adaptation' it says that 'climate change mitigation in India requires an urgent solution'. Commenting for the Guardian, Professor Simon Lewis of University College London said: \u201cThe document is important because it was commissioned by 195 governments and its summary was agreed line by line. It's a fact accepted by nations around the world and a common basis for future action." Lewis says it "will also be part of the preparations for the next UN climate talks to be held in November and December in the United Arab Emirates, known as COP28." . He continues: "COP28 will be a global clash of oil interests against a viable future, with a clarity the world has never seen before." Robin Webster, head of communications for UK-based NGO Climate Outreach, writes in the caption for Climate Home News : "The IPCC climate scientists have done their job - now we must do ours." He adds: "As citizens, we must educate and inspire our peers to act on climate change through positive and empowering campaigns." BusinessGreen editor James Murray responds to the report with a comment , stating, \u201cThe latest IPCC report is more sober than ever, and emissions are still rising\u2014but climate doomism is not the answer.\u201d Commenting for the Washington Post, columnist Eugene Robinson writes, \u201cIf we take bold, coordinated, global action now\u2014in this decade - we can limit climate change to a bearable level. But if we stay the course, then heaven help us all.\u201d Robinson adds: \u201cA market-oriented solution would be a carbon tax to incentivize the transition to clean energy. Until it is politically possible, governments must continue to support the transition to the new technology." Reuters quotes Dirk Forrister, president and chief executive of the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), as commenting under the headline: "As climate bells ring on alarm, we need to drastically expand carbon markets.\u201d<\/p>\n
Elsewhere, a piece for BBC Future looks at how to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere using the "negative emissions" that the IPCC report says will be necessary to limit global warming. An article in the Washington Post zooms in on one graph from the report under the headline: "This visual shows how climate change will affect generations." Finally, Bloomberg publishes a transcript of its reporters Akshat Rathi and Oscar Boyd's discussion about "the latest IPCC report and why it matters."<\/p>\n
Pilita Clark, Financial Times, Carbon Brief<\/em><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The sixth \u201eSummary Report\u201c of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was released this week, is still being reacted to. Commenting for the Financial Times, columnist Pilita Clark writes that it is \u201estriking how media coverage has changed since the fifth assessment.\u201c Clark writes: \u201eOn the day its first report appeared in 2013, one of the main [\u2026]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ipcc","category-klimaticka-zmena"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1443"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1443\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}