• Energy
    • Oil and gas
    • Coal
    • Emissions
    • Renewables
    • Technology
  • Policy
    • International
    • Africa
    • Asia & Pacific
    • Europe
    • North America
    • South America
  • Nature
    • Food and farming
    • Plants and forests
  • Finance
    • Public finance
    • Private finance
  • Science
    • IPCC
    • Oceans
    • Temperature
    • Extreme weather
  • Insights
    • Briefings
    • Series
    • Net Zero Bulletin
    • Newsletters
    • Unlocking key terms
  • ZCA In The Media

Do we need deep sea mining for the energy transition?

September 5, 2024 by ZCA Team Leave a Comment

Key points:

  • Deep sea mining companies and some states propose boosting supplies of minerals used to produce clean energy technologies such as batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. 
  • The International Seabed Authority aims to adopt rules on deep sea mining by 2025. 
  • On-land mining for these minerals has been taking place for years and there is no physical scarcity. However, as demand rises this decade, supply crunches are likely due to the sector’s lack of investment and recycling.
  • Given that the steepest growth in mineral demand will likely occur before 2035, deep sea mining is unlikely to ease short-term supply crunches as the sector does not yet have the technology to extract or process minerals commercially.
  • Copper, cobalt, and manganese are the minerals most available in the deep sea. However, some studies find these are not the minerals most threatened by supply crunches.
  • Solutions to short and medium-term bottlenecks for the on-land mining sector include investment, policy incentives and regulations for recycling, supply diversification, and research and development in sustainable mining.

What is deep sea mining and how would it work?

Deep sea mining refers to a process of collecting minerals from a depth of over 200 metres underwater. Three types of deep sea mining are currently being tested: 

  • Mining the ferro-manganese crusts of seamounts, or undersea mountains, by tearing up the superficial layer to obtain cobalt
  • Mining hydrothermal vents, or inactive underwater chimneys, for their copper, zinc and lead
  • Mining polymetallic nodules, which are potato-sized lumps resting on the seabed and containing ​​mainly manganese and smaller amounts of nickel, copper and cobalt.

The third option is the most popular one for mining companies as they contain high levels of minerals.1Therefore, the present analysis will focus on those metals of the polymetallic nodules: manganese, nickel, copper and cobalt. Commercialisation would require overcoming technical challenges. It involves collecting the nodules from the sea floor with a type of underwater bulldozer and ploughing the top layers of sediment, with less invasive options still in development. The nodules are pumped up to a vessel at the surface and attached sediments and organic materials are then removed and pumped back into the water. Further processing is needed to use the metals from the nodules.

Fig 1: Composition of metals in polymetallic nodules with economic interest
Source: Polymetallic Nodules, International Seabed Authority.

Where are the deep sea minerals?

Most of the most attractive mineral deposits are on the ocean floor in international waters. The Clarion-Clipperton Zone, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, is an area of particular interest to mining companies. The zone is divided into 16 exploration areas controlled by different countries and the International Seabed Authority (ISA). According to an ecologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, “the largest coal mine in Germany is less than half the size of the area that would be mined for polymetallic nodules in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in one year by one contractor”.

Individual countries can also mine the seabed in their own waters. Japan expects to begin large-scale extraction from its deep seabed in 2025. Norway’s parliament voted in favour of allowing mining in its national waters. In 2019, a deep sea mining project failed in Papua New Guinea, with the company behind the project, Nautilus, becoming insolvent and the government losing USD 101 million in investment.

Who regulates deep sea mining?

The International Seabed Authority (ISA), a United Nations-appointed body, regulates international waters. As of today, no official commercial mining operations have taken place in international waters. In 2023, the ISA failed to adopt a mining code that would regulate deep sea mining. It has set an indicative 2025 timeline to decide if and how countries may mine in international waters. 

Due to a two-year legal loophole, ISA can consider and provisionally approve mineral exploitation contracts submitted by mining companies, irrespective of whether rules are adopted and implemented. Canada-based The Metals Company announced it would submit a mining application before the end of 2024. However, ISA’s new secretary-general Leticia Carvalho stated that rules to regulate deep-sea mining will take time and that mining applications should not be approved until those rules are defined. “ISA has to find ways to compromise and reach consensus. Scientific evidence, broader participation and inclusive knowledge are the key basis of consensual decisions,” she said.

Is deep sea mining already happening?

The ISA has issued 31 exploration permits since 2001 to national agencies and private companies covering about one million square kilometres of exploration areas – roughly equivalent to the size of Egypt. However, the permits do not allow companies to undertake for-profit activities. An international law expert said that even if the ISA finalises the rules, it “does not have submersibles or ocean-going vessels at its disposal” to oversee activities properly and would need more financial resources to enforce regulations. In 2024, 32 countries oppose fast-tracking deep sea mining licences. This number has increased sharply over the past three years. Countries including China, Nauru, Norway, Russia and India remain in favour of a regulation that allows deep sea mining soon.

Environmental risks

Environmental organisations and scientists have warned that the deep sea is largely unknown, and comprehensive studies are needed to understand what role deep sea ecosystems play in carbon sequestration, global temperature cycles, biodiversity and food provision for animals and humans. Little evidence is available on the damages that such mining operations would have through wastewater release or noise pollution compared to on-land mining. One study found that after 77 years, the seabed had not recovered from a shipwreck sliding over the sea floor. It is also unclear who would be liable for environmental damages, and NGOs argue that monitoring companies’ activities would be highly challenging due to the remoteness of the offshore mining areas. 

A study published in 2024 found that polymetallic nodules produce oxygen without photosynthesis. The study raised questions about how oxygen is produced and what role it plays in the deep-sea ecosystem, increasing the need for a cautionary approach to deep sea mining.

Why are deep sea minerals such a hot topic?

Technologies such as wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, electric vehicles (EVs) and electricity networks play a crucial role in the global transition to clean energy. The production of these technologies requires different types and quantities of critical minerals. Currently, 40% of cobalt is used for manufacturing clean energy technologies.

Most minerals are used for a wide range of purposes. For instance, only 16% of mined nickel and 10% of neodymium are used for clean energy technologies. Rare earth elements are used in the production of military equipment and weapons, as well as smartphones, computer hard disks, LED lights, flat screen televisions and air transport. Cobalt and nickel are also used to manufacture consumer electronics.

Demand varies significantly depending on the mineral, and innovations such as cobalt-free batteries have reduced demand for some minerals. Table 1 shows the minerals found in polymetallic nodules which could be used to manufacture different clean energy technologies. Many other minerals are important for clean energy technologies but are not found in the deep sea. Mining companies and other business voices advocate that deep sea mining is crucial to meet the demand for clean energy technologies. 

Table 1: Minerals required for energy transition technology present in the polymetallic nodules2Nodules in the Clarion Clipperton Zone
Source: IEA, Deep-ocean polymetallic nodules as a resource for critical materials.

Do we have enough minerals for the green energy transition?

No physical scarcity

There is no physical scarcity in the earth’s crust for most critical minerals, and reserves of minerals are often geographically widespread. Demand for minerals is set to rise over the next 15 years as the transition to clean energy raises demand for solar PVs, wind turbines and batteries. According to a survey conducted by KPMG, almost 80% of executives in the metals and mining industry are confident or very confident that the industry will be able to meet the rising demand.

What causes supply crunches?

Short to medium-term supply shortages of minerals can occur due to geopolitical risks, such as:

  • External shocks (e.g. natural disasters, pandemics, wars)
  • Resource nationalism (e.g. tax disputes)
  • Export restrictions (e.g. export taxes)
  • Political instability and social unrest (e.g. corruption, labour strikes)
  • Market manipulation (e.g. market cornering, insider trading)

In the long term, a lack of investment in upstream activities can cause undersupply. Undersupply can also originate in “long lead times in opening new mines and processing of manufacturing plants, uncertainty regarding future demand, price volatility, a lack of downstream transparency, and local opposition”, according to the Intergovernmental agency IRENA. Policymakers can also impact supply by providing signals about a country’s energy transition. “If companies do not have confidence in countries’ energy and climate policies, they are likely to make investment decisions based on much more conservative expectations,” according to the IEA. 

Many minerals are currently extracted and processed in China. For instance, the country extracts 82% of global graphite, 62% of rare earths and processes more than 50% of the world’s processed manganese. According to the IEA, over the past decades, countries have “prioritised short-term profits over the importance of diversified supply chains”. Therefore, developing new refining and processing projects is challenging outside of China. Developing clean energy technologies today depends on trade relationships with China, which is considered risky by many countries, particularly by Europe and the US. The US offers production tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act to diversify mineral processing. Similarly, the EU recently set domestic targets for extraction (10%), processing (40%), and recycling (15%).

Fig 2: IEA energy transition mineral price index, January 2020-April 2024
Source: IEA, IEA energy transition mineral price index, January 2020-April 2024, Licence: CC BY 4.0. Includes a basket price for copper, major battery metals and rare earth elements.
How dangerous are supply crunches?

Mineral supply crunches are expected to have less severe consequences than shortages of fossil fuels, and events similar to the 1970s oil crisis are improbable in a net-zero world. A lack of fossil fuels in a fossil fuel economy affects all consumers using fuels such as gas, gasoline and fossil-powered electricity. A shortage of minerals in a net zero scenario only affects the short-term production of technology such as solar panels, batteries and wind turbines or the construction of new energy assets. 

Negative consequences include higher prices for minerals, as was the case in 2022 and 2023 (see Fig. 2). Subsequently, the price for clean energy technology, which depends on the scarce mineral, can increase equally. If fossil fuels are used to compensate for such bottlenecks, the pace of the energy transition could slow down.

Recycling, investments that accelerate innovation, or high prices can reduce demand for minerals. For instance, the IEA had to reduce its projections for cobalt demand due to the development of lithium iron phosphate and high-nickel chemistries, which do not require cobalt. Strong demand can also drive production. For instance, global lithium production increased by 21% in 2022 compared to 2021 amid strong demand for lithium-ion batteries and increased prices of lithium.3Excludes US production.

Which minerals could suffer from bottlenecks?

Organisations and countries have different assessments of the potential criticality or urgency of supplying certain minerals. Those differences are due to trade relationships, clean energy needs and targets, and domestic supply. Which minerals will suffer from bottlenecks also depends on the scenarios and underlying assumptions. 

Rare earths, graphite and lithium are likely to experience short-term supply crunches. However, polymetallic nodules only contain traces of those minerals. Of the deep sea minerals, most countries and regions name cobalt and nickel as the most important minerals needed for clean energy technology. According to the IEA, copper is the deep sea mineral with the greatest gap between current production and output in 2035. Anticipated mine supply from announced projects will meet 70% of copper demand by 2035. Nickel and cobalt supply could be balanced if prospective projects are considered along with confirmed projects. The European Academies’ Science Advisory Council, an association of science academies, highlights that “three of the main metals targeted in deep-sea mining (manganese, copper, and nickel) are considered to be of low supply risk while cobalt is moderate.”

When are those minerals most needed?

The IEA predicts an increased need for minerals in all its climate scenarios. When considering the deep sea minerals needed for clean energy technology, the projected demand increases by most in the present decade (see Figure 3). The five-year increase ranges from 191% to 442% between 2020 and 2025. After 2030, the rise in demand is much smaller.

Fig 3: Projected average demand increase for deep sea minerals used in clean energy technology
Source: IEA Critical Minerals Demand Datasets of 2021, 2023 and 2024.4Assumptions underpinning scenarios are often based on current conditions and then extrapolated to future demand.

This drop in demand is due to the fact that compared to fossil fuels, clean energy requires significantly less minerals. As explained in the IEA’s World Energy Outlook, in a net-zero world in 2050, every unit of energy would require two-thirds less materials, fossil fuels and minerals combined compared to 2023.

Understanding IEA Scenarios

Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS):

“A scenario which reflects current policy settings based on a sector-by-sector and country by country assessment of the specific policies that are in place, as well as those that have been announced by governments around the world.” STEPS does not include Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – country action plans to cut emissions and adapt to climate impacts.

Announced Policies Scenario (APS):

“A scenario which assumes that all climate commitments made by governments around the world, including NDCs and longer-term net zero targets, as well as targets for access to electricity and clean cooking, will be met in full and on time.”

Net Zero Scenario (NZE):

“A scenario which sets out a pathway for the global energy sector to achieve net zero CO2 emissions by 2050. It doesn’t rely on emissions reductions from outside the energy sector to achieve its goals. Universal access to electricity and clean cooking are achieved by 2030.” 

Source: IEA: Global Energy and Climate Model, 2023.

Does deep sea mining make sense for the green transition?

The steepest growth in demand for minerals will take place in the present decade, according to the IEA’s predictions. After 2030, growth in demand for key minerals will continue at a lower rate in both ambitious and less ambitious scenarios. If bottlenecks arise, they will more likely occur during this decade and at latest until 2035 due to the steep growth in demand.

Since private or public companies have not yet extracted minerals from the deep sea on a large scale, and the technology to do so is not readily available on a large scale, it seems unlikely that this solution will ease potential bottlenecks which are already happening. Until now, deep sea mining is mainly being explored by start-up companies, some of which have lost important investments due to reputational risks. Most deep-sea mining companies say they won’t be able to start commercial operations until towards the end of the decade, provided they receive clear regulatory signals. The Metals Company plans to start small-scale commercial mining in 2026. This is unlikely to happen until at least 2025, when the ISA is supposed to set rules on mining in international waters. Given the new ISA’s secretary-general stance on the importance of regulation, the deadline is likely to be postponed further. Companies will likely only be ready to mine after the demand for critical minerals has peaked. Moreover, technology to process deep sea minerals is still being developed and would have to mature before 2030 to ease the bottlenecks.

It is also unclear if deep sea mining is cost-competitive compared to on-land mining. A report by think tank Planet Tracker shows that seafloor restoration would cost USD 5.3 million-5.7 million per square kilometre – which is more than the revenue a typical company would make from deep sea mining.

What are the alternatives to deep sea mining?

More sustainable land mining practices, battery recycling, substitution and demand reduction measures could reduce the likelihood of mineral supply crunches. This is especially important since minerals are used for a wide range of purposes outside of producing net zero technology. One study found that “without sufficient and adequate resource saving measures it will be difficult or impossible for a substantial part of the future world population to attain the service level of mineral resources prevailing in developed countries at this moment.”

Sustainable land mining 

Declining ore grades, long permit times and waste characterise the mining sector on land. A just transition needs more investment in research and development and commitments to sustainable mining practices.5Initiatives include Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) and the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA). Mining in line with a just transition is also highly dependent on meaningful stakeholder dialogue, increased local ownership and sanctioning reporting gaps by mining companies.

Diversifying supply

There is an urgent need to diversify the supply of minerals. Despite Western countries highlighting the threats of putting all their eggs in one basket, the concentration of processing plants has increased in the last years for nickel and cobalt. Currently, around 70% of critical mineral reserves are located in Africa, where they are extracted and shipped in their crude form to China, where the refining, processing and manufacturing take place. From there, they are shipped to the US and EU.

Many Global South countries could be vital in reshaping the mining and processing landscape. Indonesia is a good example of how an export ban on raw materials has successfully pushed for investments in the local manufacturing sector. Hopes are high for India, too, which has announced plans to auction around 20 blocks of critical minerals.

Recycling

Minerals and metals can be reused and recycled continuously if the right infrastructure and technologies are available – a significant advantage compared to fossil fuel infrastructure. The US has allocated a budget of about USD 6.33 billion for battery development, including recycling. The EU has set domestic targets for battery recycling in the EU Raw Materials Act of 15%. Similar and more ambitious measures such as extended producer responsibility, are necessary to ease medium to long-term bottlenecks.6Extended Producer Responsibility is a concept by which the producer has to take care of the product even after it isn’t used anymore. For instance, car producers would have to take back and recycle batteries of cars after their end of life.

Substitution

Sustained high prices for a material, pressures to reduce costs, geopolitical issues or environmental and social concerns can accelerate the search for alternative materials. “Perceptions that many metals are critical and scarce for renewable energy transitions appear exaggerated if a dynamic view on technological development is adopted,” one study found. Current lithium-ion batteries require cobalt or nickel, but new alternatives such as Svolt’s cobalt-free lithium-ion car battery or Tesla’s lithium-ion phosphate batteries reduce demand for those minerals. An IEA report showed that between 2005 and 2018, patenting for batteries and similar storage technologies grew at an average rate of 14% worldwide every year, four times faster than the average for all technology.

Demand reduction

In a world of scarcity and environmental fragility, reducing demand is necessary and increasingly plays a role in projections. Restricted lithium availability raises questions about the sustainable use of battery electric vehicles. Globally, 40% of battery electric vehicles are SUVs, and only roughly 20% are small-sized cars. In the US, SUVs account for 60%, and less than 10% are small cars. Similarly, 37% of households in the US possess two vehicles. These trends push up the size of the battery, the requirement of minerals and the prices, excluding many households from participating in sustainable practices. Nevertheless, if all announced manufacturing plans for EV batteries are implemented globally, there would be enough capacity to fulfil expected demand requirements in 2030 in the IEA’s NZE Scenario for EVs. 

Note: This is an updated version of a briefing originally published by Zero Carbon Analytics in November 2023.

  • 1
    Therefore, the present analysis will focus on those metals of the polymetallic nodules: manganese, nickel, copper and cobalt.
  • 2
    Nodules in the Clarion Clipperton Zone
  • 3
    Excludes US production.
  • 4
    Assumptions underpinning scenarios are often based on current conditions and then extrapolated to future demand.
  • 5
    Initiatives include Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) and the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA).
  • 6
    Extended Producer Responsibility is a concept by which the producer has to take care of the product even after it isn’t used anymore. For instance, car producers would have to take back and recycle batteries of cars after their end of life.

Filed Under: Briefings, Energy, Renewables, Technology Tagged With: Electric vehicles, Energy transition, IEA, mining, net zero, oceans, Renewables

Unpacking 2023’s unprecedented heat  

November 10, 2023 by ZCA Team Leave a Comment

Key Points:

  • Scientists predict that 2023 will be the hottest year to date, with record-high temperatures observed on land and in the sea.
  • June, July, August, September and October this year were the hottest months since records began in the mid-1800s.
  • These temperature extremes are occurring against a backdrop of a planet that has already warmed to unprecedented levels. Every fraction of a degree of warming at the global level increases the odds of additional and often extreme climate impacts, such as heatwaves and severe rainfall.
  • The long-term build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels is the main factor driving increases in earth’s temperature.
  • The speed at which the earth is warming is accelerating at unprecedented levels, and record high greenhouse gas emissions are primarily to blame.
  • Other natural and human-caused factors are acting on top of a high baseline global temperature, edging us towards record-breaking heat at increasingly fast rates as the warming trajectory of the planet continues upwards. Those factors include:
    • A developing El Niño
    • Natural and human-caused variability in Atlantic sea surface temperatures
    • An unusual volcanic eruption
    • Reduced Saharan dust and particulate emissions
    • Reduced sulphur emissions from shipping fuels
    • Record low sea ice levels
    • The 11-year solar cycle
  • Overshooting the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C – even temporarily – could have devastating impacts by catalysing large and often irreversible changes to climate systems.
  • At current emissions rates, we may only have six years left until we blow our remaining carbon budget to keep warming below 1.5°C.
  • The impacts of climate change will only worsen until we stop putting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than can be removed by the planet.

Temperature extremes in a warming world

Record heat in 2023

June, July, August, September and October this year were unambiguously the hottest months since records began in the mid-1800s, according to data from tens of thousands of meteorological stations across the world.1Scientists are confident that this is the warmest decade in the last 125,000 years. Scientists are now confident that 2023 will be the hottest year on record to date, despite initial predictions that it could be the fourth-hottest year.

September’s heat was particularly unusual, with the highest temperature anomaly – an indication of how divergent temperatures are from the long-term average – ever recorded for any month. One climate scientist described this unprecedented 0.5°C anomaly, which made September around 1.8°C hotter than pre-industrial levels, as “absolutely gobsmackingly bananas”.2Depending on the dataset used, the level of warming may be 1.7°C or 1.8°C. The impacts of this year’s heat were felt across the world: Africa, Europe, North America, South America and Antarctica all had their hottest September on record. Alongside higher land temperatures, sea surface temperatures have been at record high levels since April this year.

The average temperature for 2023 will very likely be more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. A breach of the Paris Agreement goal would require temperatures to be sustained above 1.5°C for at least 20 years, so this does not mean we have blown our chance. However, the fact that we are increasingly seeing average monthly temperatures above this goal signals that we are getting closer.3The Paris Agreement – a legally binding international treaty on climate change – set a goal to limit “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”

Global warming fuels extremes

Temperature extremes such as those recorded this year are occurring in a planet that has already warmed to unprecedented levels – the past eight years were the warmest on record. The speed of this warming has accelerated over the last decade, reaching an unprecedented rate of more than 0.2°C over 2013–2022. Scientists attribute this to record-high greenhouse gas emissions and reduced aerosols – particles in the atmosphere that scatter or absorb the sun’s radiation. Every fraction of a degree of warming at the global level increases the odds of additional, and often extreme, impacts at regional and local levels. With the increased build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, heatwaves are becoming hotter and more frequent. As emphasised by climate scientist Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, “It only takes a small change in average temperature for the frequency of extremes to completely blow out, which is what we’ve seen in the Northern Hemisphere recently”.

The global temperature is an average taken from across the world, with actual temperatures at different locations ranging from much lower to much higher, meaning the impacts of warming are unequally distributed. For example, average July temperatures in some parts of northern Canada this year were more than 7°C above the 30-year average.4Parts of northern Canada fall within the Arctic, which has been warming at four times the rate of the global average over the last four decades. This extreme heat, combined with unusually dry conditions, fuelled unprecedented wildfires in the region, highlighting how temporary spikes in temperature combined with longer-term elevated warming can have devastating consequences.5The extent of burned area by the end of July was twice as high as the previous record for the whole of 1995. “Summer 2023’s record-setting temperatures aren’t just a set of numbers – they result in dire real-world consequences,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson.

Events such as wildfires may have knock-on effects that fuel further warming: the fires in Canada this year have released record-high carbon emissions, risking the creation of a self-perpetuating cycle that speeds up warming, known as a positive feedback loop.6More than double the wildfire emissions of a previous record-high year. Warmer, drier conditions as a result of climate change create the conditions for wildfires, and wildfires further fuel climate change by releasing stored carbon and reducing the carbon sink capacity of forests as they burn down, which then creates warmer and drier conditions, ultimately locking us into more warming.

Climate is complex

While the overall warming trend does not come as a surprise to scientists and matches projections by climate models, the extent to which temperature records have been broken this year – particularly the 0.5°C September anomaly – is remarkable. This is because temperature records are typically broken by margins of 0.1 or 0.2°C. To better understand this anomaly, scientists scrutinised over 150 outputs from climate models to work out the chances of a 0.5°C September anomaly. They found that the chance is very low – roughly 1 in 10,000 in any given September.

Some models may not be fully capturing certain processes that add to warming. Recent developments in policy, leading to reduced pollution for example, have occurred faster and in different places than previously anticipated. Similarly, the impacts of natural processes – which are infinitely complex – can be difficult to predict: a volcanic eruption in the South Pacific last year was unusual in that it may have had a warming effect rather than a cooling effect due to an uncharacteristically low level of sulphur dioxide.

The Earth’s climate system is made up of complex dynamics and interactions among various natural and human-caused processes. Exact future temperatures are hard to predict, and will become harder as the world warms and weather becomes harder to forecast. However, we do know that rising heat will have catastrophic consequences, and we should do everything in our power to limit overall warming as soon as possible.

Interplay between long-term warming and natural variability

Air temperatures on earth have a natural degree of variability due to factors such as changes in solar radiation, ocean-atmosphere interactions and volcanic eruptions. This inherent variability means that even if there was no global warming, average global temperatures would not be identical from year to year. However, it is clear that global warming – fuelled by the long-term build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels – is driving the persistent upward trend in global average temperatures since industrial times, and that the natural variability of the climate system has had very little impact on this trend.

Contributors to temperature spikes

Though global warming is a gradual process that can’t solely explain the sharp uptick in temperatures observed this year, a number of other factors – such as an emerging El Niño, an unusual volcanic eruption in the South Pacific, and decreased sulphur dioxide emissions from shipping – are acting on top of a high baseline global temperature, edging us towards record-breaking heat at increasingly fast rates as the warming trajectory of the planet continues upwards (Figure 1).7Compared to the 1970-2014 period, climate models project global warming to be 40% faster in the period between 2015 and 2030. These other factors are responsible for the variability in temperatures – such as spikes in heat – witnessed at daily, monthly or yearly scales, but are not driving the persistent long-term warming trend. It just so happens that they are occurring all at once in an increasingly hot world. The exact contribution of these other factors to temperature spikes is highly variable and uncertain, with some playing very small roles.

Figure 1: Factors contributing to global temperature change over the last 10 years
Source: Berkeley Earth, August 2023 Temperature Update, 2023.
El Niño

El Niño is a natural climate phenomenon occurring every two to seven years whereby sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean are warmer than average, causing short-term increases in global average temperatures as heat is pushed from the ocean into the atmosphere. El Niño events are often correlated with the hottest years on record. The previous hottest year on record, 2016, was during a “super El Niño event” – one of the three strongest in history. There is a growing scientific consensus that human-caused warming has, at least partly, made El Niño more variable and difficult to predict.
Some scientists have speculated that El Niño has been one of the main drivers of extreme heat this year, particularly as there was a rapid transition earlier this year from its cold counterpart La Niña, which has been in effect during the past three years.8The last La Niña event was a rare ’triple-dip’ event lasting three years, which was associated with various impacts and natural disasters around the world. Others are more cautious, pointing out that El Niño was only in its early phase at the onset of the record-breaking heat this year and that its biggest impacts are only anticipated in February to April next year. Temperatures typically respond around three months after El Niño peaks, which is only expected around the end of this year. There will likely be greater clarity on the role of El Niño in early 2024.

Warming oceans

Even before El Niño officially started this year, global average sea surface temperatures were already 0.1°C higher than the previous record, with marine heatwaves detected around the world. As the Pacific Ocean represents around half of the world’s ocean area – and El Niño originates in the Pacific – what happens in the Pacific will tend to have a significant impact on global sea temperatures.

Warming has also been exceptional in the North Atlantic Ocean, which in June was a record 0.5°C warmer than the long-term average, with localised extreme marine heatwaves of up to 5°C higher than average recorded. Natural variability in sea surface temperatures linked to the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation – a cyclical pattern of warm and cool sea surface temperatures – may partly explain these warmer temperatures. Research also shows that much of the heat stored in the subtropical North Atlantic is in deeper waters, with currents redistributing this heat to other regions of the ocean – believed to be a key driver of North Atlantic warming. At the same time, lower than average wind speeds in the northeastern Atlantic mean there is less mixing of colder ocean water from lower depths, causing sea surface temperatures to rise. Low winds also resulted in fewer dust particles – which scatter solar radiation back into the atmosphere before it can warm the ocean – being blown off the Sahara over the ocean. Similarly, reduced particulate pollution in North America and Europe, driven by policies on air quality, may have had a similar effect by reflecting less radiation.

It is important to remember that these processes – whether El Niño or reduced Saharan dust – are happening on top of an already warming ocean: more than 90% of global heat caused by greenhouse gas emissions has been absorbed by the ocean.9As oceans continue to warm, they will take up less heat from the atmosphere and cause global average surface temperatures to rise further. “Over the long term, we’re seeing more heat and warmer sea surface temperatures pretty much everywhere…[t]hat long-term trend is almost entirely attributable to human[s]”, said Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Unlike this long-term trend, changes in wind speeds or particulate pollution typically have very small impacts on longer-term temperature averages but do contribute to sudden spikes in temperature.

Low sea ice levels

Decades of warming has led to lower than average sea ice in Antarctica and the Arctic. Low sea ice levels may increase local warming, and at the same time, local warming may lower sea ice levels. Lower sea ice reinforces warming because less ice means less solar radiation reflected back into space and more radiation absorbed by the ocean, causing further warming and delaying sea ice growth. However, scientists are uncertain of the extent to which the lower sea ice influenced the warm conditions observed in Antarctica this year.

Volcanic eruption in the South Pacific

The lower sea ice and higher earth temperatures observed this year may have been influenced by the eruption of an undersea volcano in January 2022, which increased the amount of water vapour in the upper atmosphere, where it potentially acted as a powerful greenhouse gas and trapped heat. The additional warming caused by this eruption is not yet known, with some scientists speculating that its contribution is likely quite small, and others suggesting that more analysis is needed to fully understand the impacts.

Sulphur regulations

Researchers have suggested that regulations imposed on emissions of sulphur – a harmful air pollutant emitted by marine fuels – from shipping since 2020 could have also contributed to temperature spikes this year. This is because sulphur particles – which are harmful to human health – reflect radiation back into the atmosphere or block sunlight by forming ‘pollution clouds’, and their reduction has a warming effect. Estimates suggest that the cuts in particulate emissions from shipping regulations are equal to two additional years of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions at current rates. However, scientists caution that while a reduction in sulphur emissions may boost warming by around 0.045°C over the next few decades, it is unlikely to have any major influence on long-term global warming. 

As a counterbalance to temporary spikes in warming as aerosols are cleaned up, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommends reducing human-caused methane emissions. While carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for a long time – up to 1,000 years – before breaking down, methane has a much shorter lifespan of around 12 years.10If we were to stop all methane emissions right now, global warming caused by methane would be halved in around 20 years. Methane also has more warming power as it absorbs more energy than carbon dioxide. This means that reductions in warming can be quickly achieved with methane emission cuts – reducing methane emissions from the energy sector alone could avoid up to 0.1°C of warming by mid-century.     

Solar fluctuations

Another natural phenomenon contributing to global temperatures is fluctuations in the output of the sun as part of the 11-year solar cycle. During this cycle, the average temperature of the earth increases by around 0.05°C. The current solar cycle is heading towards its peak, with the latest evidence suggesting that the sun’s activity has already reached levels not seen for 20 years. The current solar cycle is expected to peak between January and October 2024 – around the same time that the warming impacts of El Niño are expected to be greatest.

Overshooting 1.5°C of warming

The 2015 Paris Agreement aims to avoid “unleashing far more severe climate change impacts, including more frequent and severe droughts, heatwaves and rainfall”. The point in time where we breach 1.5°C of warming is getting dangerously close. Latest estimates show that we may only have six years left of emissions at current levels before our carbon budget runs out.

In the IPCC’s report on the impacts of 1.5°C of global warming, 90% of the emissions scenarios that limit warming to 1.5°C by 2100 include a period of ‘temperature overshoot’. Temperature overshoot describes when global average temperatures exceed 1.5°C (or 2°C) of warming before returning to that level at some point in the future. In most of the IPCC pathways – which describe different levels of greenhouse gas emissions for reaching a certain level of warming – global average temperatures exceed the target for at least one decade and up to several before dropping back down – achieved through the deployment of carbon dioxide removal.11Many pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C rely on the deployment of carbon dioxide removal technologies, which are ‘uncertain and entail clear risks’.

The magnitude – how much the specified level of warming is exceeded – and the duration – how long that level of warming is exceeded – differ across scenarios. Keeping the magnitude and duration of overshoot as low as possible is critical if we are to avoid the worst climate impacts to people and the planet. Every fraction of a degree of overshoot increases the severity, frequency and duration of climate impacts, such as heatwaves, as does whether we meet temperature targets early in the century or not. In addition, the closer we stick to 1.5°C, the better the economic outcome. Climate impacts from temperature overshoot will lead to higher mitigation costs and economic losses later in the century.12While higher initial investments are needed to keep temperatures down, this is outweighed by the economic benefits later in the century.

Tipping points

Scientists warn that overshooting 1.5°C – even temporarily – could have devastating and irreversible impacts. Numerous ‘tipping points’ could be crossed with just 1.5°C of warming. These are critical thresholds at which the global climate system tips into another state, triggering feedback loops and catalysing large and often irreversible changes to the climate.

One tipping point is the drying of the Amazon rainforest, caused by deforestation, fires and less rainfall, which could transform this critical carbon sink into a savanna. This would not only impact the millions of people and animals living in the region, but would result in billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere – further fuelling global warming – as well as less rainfall and changes to global climate patterns. 

In addition to triggering tipping points, overshoot could temporarily push thousands of species beyond the range of temperatures at which they can survive. For some species, life may not fully recover after overshoot: even temporary overshoot could cause irreversible extinctions and lasting damage to tens of thousands of species, with knock-on effects for entire ecosystems. If we are to limit warming to 1.5°C with limited or no overshoot, deep, rapid and immediate reductions in emissions are essential.

Solutions

Cutting emissions

Emissions are at an all-time high and are rising, with atmospheric carbon dioxide levels higher than they have been for at least four million years. Continued warming means land and ocean carbon sinks will become increasingly less effective at slowing the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If reductions in emissions are achieved now, there would still be a lag in the warming response of the earth.13If we stopped all greenhouse gas emissions today, there’s still a 42% chance that we would overshoot 1.5°C. However, pursuing strict mitigation measures to keep warming under 1.5°C with limited or no overshoot would substantially reduce climate risks over the next 20 years and allow societies and ecosystems to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. To do this, net carbon dioxide emissions would need to be reduced by 48% by 2030, according to the IPCC.

The fastest and cheapest way to deliver emissions cuts is to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels for energy and switch to renewable-powered electricity. To limit warming to 1.5°C with limited or no overshoot, the use of coal would need to be reduced by 100%, oil by 60% and gas by 70% by 2050.14This is assuming no carbon capture, storage and utilisation. There would need to be increased electrification of energy, with almost all electricity coming from zero-carbon or low-carbon sources. Since 2010, solar and wind power have become cost-competitive with fossil fuels globally – the current average levelised cost of solar photovoltaic is almost one-third less than the cheapest fossil fuel.15The levelised cost is the price at which electricity should be sold for the system to break even at the end of its lifetime. In 2022, electricity fuel costs of USD 520 billion were saved as a result of renewable capacity added since 2010. Rapid renewables deployment – around 1,000 GW per year until 2030 – will be critical for keeping warming to 1.5°C.

Reducing methane

One promising solution for rapidly reducing global warming involves cutting emissions of methane – which has contributed around one-third of global warming since pre-industrial times. Methane concentrations in the atmosphere have been rising dangerously quickly since around 2007, and have reached record levels in recent years. Due to its short lifespan, cutting methane emissions offers the “single fastest, most effective way to slow the rate of warming right now”. It is also one of the cheapest ways to reduce warming. By using cost-effective measures such as reducing leaks from pipelines, shutting down abandoned oil wells and reducing livestock numbers, human-caused methane emissions could be reduced by up to 45% by 2030, avoiding nearly 0.3°C of warming by the 2040s.16UNEP, Global Methane Assessment, 2021. Pg 8. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-methane-assessment-benefits-and-costs-mitigating-methane-emissions According to the IPCC, a reduction of 34% is needed by 2030, along with cuts to other greenhouse gas emissions, to achieve 1.5°C with limited to no overshoot without relying on carbon dioxide removal.

Agriculture, and particularly livestock farming, is the single largest source of methane emissions from human activity, and livestock emissions are expected to increase by up to 16% by 2030. Through reducing livestock numbers, improving livestock nutrition and breeding, and reducing food loss and waste, significant reductions in warming from methane can be achieved in the next few decades. According to the International Energy Agency, technology to reduce methane emissions from fossil fuel operations – which account for around 40% of methane emissions from human sources – already exists and could cut around 70% of emissions from this sector.

Carbon dioxide removal

Proposed solutions for reducing warming can be nature-based, such as planting trees which store carbon in their tissues, or growing crops, burning them for energy, and storing the released carbon. There are also technological solutions, such as machines that suck carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it long term, called direct air capture and storage. Collectively, these approaches are referred to as carbon dioxide removal (CDR).

There are major uncertainties with both nature-based and technological solutions: forests burn down, risking the release of stored carbon, and there is limited space for planting trees. Growing energy crops requires large areas of land, which could potentially endanger biodiversity through the conversion of natural land or threaten human food security by supplanting food crops. Machines for drawing carbon from the atmosphere are not yet fully developed and are expensive, and none of these solutions have been shown to work at the scale needed. The world’s largest direct air capture plant only saves us 3 seconds of emissions per year. Atmospheric physics and the changing nature of forests as carbon sinks are also not fully understood, but current evidence suggests that CDR may not compensate for emissions on a like-to-like basis. The reduction in atmospheric carbon dioxide achieved by deploying CDR may be less than 10% of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere from an equal amount of emissions.

Forest carbon offsets – under which companies or individuals can purchase credits for preserving a forest or planting a tree that is equal to the amount of carbon to be offset in order to achieve their net-zero pledges – have been shown to be ineffective and are marred by alleged greenwashing and dubious accounting methods.

The uncertainty around the effectiveness of these technologies offers a strong incentive for ramping up climate action in the near-term to reduce our reliance on them. However, because emission reductions have been so delayed, some amount of CDR will be necessary to meet 1.5°C, together with decarbonisation of energy and electricity, electrification, and deep emissions cuts, particularly of methane. In IPCC pathways that limit warming to 1.5°C with limited or no overshoot, CDR is only used in sectors for which no mitigation measure is available and to counterbalance historical emissions. The longer we delay emissions cuts, the more we will have to rely on unproven technologies to reduce warming and risk large-scale, irreversible impacts on society and nature.

Immediate, meaningful action now can bring benefits within our lifetime. Bold pledges and policies, stricter net-zero standards, and strengthened accountability are needed to deliver real and immediate emissions cuts.

  • 1
    Scientists are confident that this is the warmest decade in the last 125,000 years.
  • 2
    Depending on the dataset used, the level of warming may be 1.7°C or 1.8°C.
  • 3
    The Paris Agreement – a legally binding international treaty on climate change – set a goal to limit “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”
  • 4
    Parts of northern Canada fall within the Arctic, which has been warming at four times the rate of the global average over the last four decades.
  • 5
    The extent of burned area by the end of July was twice as high as the previous record for the whole of 1995.
  • 6
    More than double the wildfire emissions of a previous record-high year.
  • 7
    Compared to the 1970-2014 period, climate models project global warming to be 40% faster in the period between 2015 and 2030.
  • 8
    The last La Niña event was a rare ’triple-dip’ event lasting three years, which was associated with various impacts and natural disasters around the world.
  • 9
    As oceans continue to warm, they will take up less heat from the atmosphere and cause global average surface temperatures to rise further.
  • 10
    If we were to stop all methane emissions right now, global warming caused by methane would be halved in around 20 years. Methane also has more warming power as it absorbs more energy than carbon dioxide.
  • 11
    Many pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C rely on the deployment of carbon dioxide removal technologies, which are ‘uncertain and entail clear risks’.
  • 12
    While higher initial investments are needed to keep temperatures down, this is outweighed by the economic benefits later in the century.
  • 13
    If we stopped all greenhouse gas emissions today, there’s still a 42% chance that we would overshoot 1.5°C.
  • 14
    This is assuming no carbon capture, storage and utilisation.
  • 15
    The levelised cost is the price at which electricity should be sold for the system to break even at the end of its lifetime.
  • 16
    UNEP, Global Methane Assessment, 2021. Pg 8. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-methane-assessment-benefits-and-costs-mitigating-methane-emissions

Filed Under: Briefings, Science, Temperature Tagged With: 1.5C, Climate Disaster, Climate science, heatwaves, oceans

Australia, a global climate outlier?

November 3, 2023 by ZCA Team Leave a Comment

Key points:

  • Australia’s environmental laws currently fall short in addressing climate change. The country does not have a climate trigger mechanism, despite having one of the highest rates of biodiversity loss in the world.
  • There is a growing number of countries, including the US, UK and New Zealand, that include climate change and emissions considerations in their environmental frameworks.
  • The Australian government’s stance on fossil fuels stands in contrast to warnings from international scientific bodies regarding the urgency of addressing climate change.
  • Australia could be responsible for up to 17% of global carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 if planned expansion of fossil fuels goes ahead.
  • The introduction of a climate trigger presents a chance for the country to align itself with global efforts in tackling GHG emissions from fossil fuel projects and reverse alarming environmental trends.

What is a climate trigger?

A climate trigger means governments have to consider the emissions and climate change impact of a project when assessing whether it should go ahead. Several countries and economies, including the US, UK, European Union, New Zealand and Canada, include assessments of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other climate change considerations in their environmental regulatory frameworks. However, Australia currently has no explicit mechanism to account for climate change and the impacts of fossil fuel projects in its national environmental laws.

Australia’s environmental backbone

Australia has a dual approach to environmental governance, with individual states and territories having their own environmental laws and regulation, alongside national law governed primarily by the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act). While state and territory laws address environmental concerns within their jurisdictions, the EPBC Act serves as a comprehensive framework that complements and coordinates these efforts.

The EPBC Act designates nine key areas as matters of national environmental significance, or triggers, including specific regions, species and ecosystems that hold ecological value and require protection at the national level. If a project is deemed likely to have a significant impact on one of these areas, then a thorough impact assessment and environmental approval process is “triggered.”

The nine triggers identified under the EPBC Act are:
  1. World Heritage properties: These include the Great Barrier Reef and the Tasmanian Wilderness.
  2. National Heritage places: Sites recognised for their outstanding heritage value to the nation, such as iconic landmarks or culturally significant areas.
  3. Wetlands of international importance: Designated under the Ramsar Convention, an international treaty aimed at conserving key wetland ecosystems and their biodiversity.
  4. Listed threatened species and ecological communities: Endangered species and ecosystems that are at risk of extinction or significant decline.
  5. Listed migratory species: Migratory birds and marine species that require protection during seasonal movements across national and international borders.
  6. Commonwealth marine areas: The marine environment within Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone, such as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.
  7. Nuclear actions: Activities related to uranium mining, nuclear power plants, and other nuclear-related actions.
  8. Water resources: The impacts of coal seam gas and large-scale coal mining on water quality and availability.
  9. The Great Barrier Reef: Activities that may impact water quality, coastal development and shipping activities
Criticism of current laws

The lack of a climate trigger has prompted concerns in Australia over the effectiveness of the EPBC Act, in which “climate change” appears just once, as well as the country’s commitment to the 2015 Paris Agreement. Advocates of a climate trigger argue that its omission results in insufficient scrutiny of activities. Projects with substantial climate impacts are allowed to proceed without undergoing the same rigorous assessments as those falling under other triggers, leading to potential habitat degradation and exposing ecosystems to climate-related risks.

Importance of climate trigger for Australia

Increasingly high temperatures, wildfires and other climate impacts have significantly disrupted numerous ecosystems and species in Australia. The country has one of the highest extinction rates of plant and animal species in the world. Since 1999, 84% of threatened species have experienced habitat loss. In the last seven years, Australia witnessed a series of marine heatwaves that lead to four mass coral bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef, causing a 50% decline in the coral population. Climate change has the potential to exacerbate these losses by fivefold.

Climate triggers globally

Globally, there is a growing trend of countries incorporating climate change considerations into their national environmental frameworks, and the assessment of projects with large amounts of GHG by independent bodies has become standard practice. Examples include the EU, the UK, the US, Canada and New Zealand.

While the environmental frameworks of these countries differ in scope, enforceability and effectiveness, they all prioritise human well-being. The frameworks of the UK, US, and Canada do not explicitly mandate GHG assessments, but GHG considerations are indirectly addressed through other legal mechanisms. Climate change considerations, while not always explicitly mentioned, are increasingly woven into these frameworks, reflecting a global imperative to address climate-related challenges.

Table 1: Comparative analysis of environmental legislation

The countries chosen for analysis — the UK, EU, US, Canada and New Zealand — were selected based on several criteria to enable meaningful comparisons. New Zealand’s proximity to Australia provides regional relevance. The EU and UK dominate global climate discussions, while similarities in political systems led to the inclusion of Canada and the US.

Comparative-analysis-of-environmental-legislationDownload

Australia’s climate trigger proposal

The debate over whether to adopt a climate trigger mechanism in Australia has been ongoing for decades, and several proposals, including a bill submitted by then Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage Anthony Albanese, failed to win enough support. This was due to concerns that such a trigger would harm jobs, economic development and investment, or clash with existing environmental legislation.

In 2020, a review of the EPBC Act found that it had failed to adequately protect Australia’s vulnerable flora, fauna and ecological communities. The Australian government has committed to revising the Act, and in December 2022 a series of reforms were proposed by the government to be adopted in late 2023. However, climate change considerations were still not addressed.

The Australian Greens plan to submit a proposal for a climate trigger, in order to position the country on par with international trends. Building on an unsuccessful 2020 proposal, the new bill is expected to cover the following:

  • Ministerial authority on carbon dioxide emissions: the bill would grant the climate minister the authority to factor in GHG emissions when making project-related decisions. These powers are categorised into two thresholds:
  • Significant Impact on Emissions: Projects emitting 25,000 to 100,000 tonnes of GHG emissions annually must be evaluated by the ministry, ensuring alignment with the national carbon budget and emission reduction targets.
  • Prohibited Impact on Emissions: Projects emitting over 100,000 tonnes will automatically be denied approval.
  • Introduction of national carbon budget and enhanced roles for the Climate Change Authority (CCA): The CCA is an Australian government agency responsible for providing independent advice on climate change policy. If passed, the bill will mandate the CCA to develop a national carbon budget spanning from 2023 to 2049 in terms of total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions. The CCA must conduct annual evaluations of the remaining budget, while the minister is responsible for evaluating projects, considering the ongoing assessments of the budget.
How does Australia’s climate trigger compare globally?

While most laws discussed in Table 1 are undergoing revisions to better address the challenges posed by climate change, parallels can be drawn between some of them and Australia’s Climate Trigger proposal. Under the Climate Change Act 2008, the UK became the world’s first country to establish legally binding carbon budgets. The measure closely resembles what the Climate Trigger bill aims to introduce in Australia — a national carbon budget, accompanied by annual evaluation of new projects. In Canada, the environment minister was also given authority to require assessments for certain projects if they could have adverse climate impacts. These parallels underscore how Australia’s bill aligns with international efforts to address climate change and responsibly manage emissions, something that is argued to be lacking in the current EPBC Act.

However, what sets the Australian Greens’ bill apart from other laws is its commitment to explicit emissions thresholds. Among the countries examined, none of them automatically ban projects that exceed specific emissions limits. While this doesn’t prevent new fossil fuel projects being approved that emit more than initially estimated, it does pave the way for regulating these emissions.

Next steps for Australia’s climate trigger mechanism

The bill is currently under consideration by an environmental committee in the Australian Senate and a final ruling is expected in December 2023. A majority of lawmakers in parliament now recognize the need for government intervention in addressing climate change, and the crossbench offers strong support for a climate trigger.1The crossbench is where independent and minor party members sit in Australia’s parliament.

However, there has been a significant shift in the stance of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Labor party since 2005. The current Labor government has ruled out a ban on new fossil fuel developments as long as investors perceive demand for coal and gas. It argues that introducing flexible measures, such as carbon offsets, would allow fossil fuel projects to proceed while still enabling the country to achieve its 43% emissions reduction target for 2030. The government’s position diverges from the warnings of organisations such as the United Nations, and leading climate science bodies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency.

Australia is the world’s third-largest exporter of fossil fuels behind Russia and Saudi Arabia, accounting for about 7%. In 2022, Australia had twice the electricity use per capita of China, and 47% of its electricity was generated by coal-fired power plants — more than four times the global average. Since 2014, the expansion of LNG production in Australia has grown by 360%, leading to a significant increase in national emissions levels. By 2030, Australia could potentially be responsible for up to 17% of global emissions, up from about 5% currently, if government and industry projections for fossil fuel expansion go ahead.

The Climate Trigger bill offers Australia the opportunity to take accountability for its emissions and the global harm caused by fossil fuels extracted within the country. If passed, it may help to reverse concerning environmental and biodiversity trends.2Assumes that the rest of the world adopts policies in line with the Paris Agreement.

  • 1
    The crossbench is where independent and minor party members sit in Australia’s parliament.
  • 2
    Assumes that the rest of the world adopts policies in line with the Paris Agreement.

Filed Under: Asia & Pacific, Briefings, Policy Tagged With: Australia, Biodiversity, Climate models, CO2 emissions, Greenhouse gases, law, Mitigation, oceans

The impacts of El Niño on a warming planet

June 15, 2023 by ZCA Team Leave a Comment

Key points:

  • El Niño is a natural climate phenomenon, typically lasting 9-12 months, that has been linked to crop failures, more frequent wildfires and concurrent droughts, increased flood risk, disruptions to fisheries, elevated civil conflict and increased disease risk in various regions
  • Present forecasts predict an 84% chance of at least a moderate El Niño and a ±56% chance of a strong El Niño for 2023-2024
  • The first year that we see average temperatures exceed 1.5°C could be during El Niño. While this would not mean that the Paris Agreement target has been transgressed, it is a reminder that we are getting closer to this threshold    
  • The frequency and severity of El Niño events increased in the latter part of the 20th century, and climate change is projected to further increase both, as well as making these events more difficult to predict
  • El Niño involves complex interplay among various atmospheric phenomena, making its impacts difficult to predict. However, it is associated with some general weather trends around the world, including:
    • Increased rainfall and flooding risk in East Africa, northern Mexico, the southern US, Peru and Ecuador  
    • Elevated fire risk in Indonesia, Australia and the Amazon 
    • Drought conditions in India, southern Africa, the Philippines, Indonesia, the Amazon and Australia  
    • Warm conditions in Canada and the northern US
  • Countries and ecosystems are already experiencing impacts from climate change, such as heatwaves, droughts and floods, and El Niño is likely to make these impacts worse.

El Niño

First described by Peruvian fishermen in the late nineteenth century as warm ocean waters around Christmas time that disrupt fishing conditions, El Niño is a natural climate phenomenon in which sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific are warmer than average. Under normal (or neutral) atmospheric conditions, trade winds – the east-to-west winds that blow along the earth’s equator – transport warm water from South America to Asia, which is then replaced by cooler water from lower depths. This process, referred to as upwelling, brings nutrients to the surface water, creating fertile fishing grounds. During an El Niño event, the trade winds weaken, causing warm water to accumulate in the Pacific Ocean. By contrast, when the trade winds are strong, the opposite happens and more warm water is transported to Asia – called a La Niña event. These two opposing processes – El Niño and La Niña – make up the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle. 

In the past, ENSO events were described as Eastern-Pacific (EP) events, because the Eastern Pacific was where the maximum warming was located. However, the last four decades have seen an increase in the frequency of Central-Pacific (CP) events,1CP El Niño events are also referred to as “El Niño Modoki” and “warm pool El Niño”. where the maximum warming is located in the central equatorial Pacific. The characteristics and associated impacts of these two events differ.2EP ENSO has stronger El Niño events compared to La Niña events, whereas CP ENSO has stronger La Niña events compared to El Niño events.   

The latest El Niño forecast, issued in June this year by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, states that El Niño has started and is expected to gradually strengthen during the Northern Hemispheric winter of 2023-2024. There is a ±56% chance of a strong El Niño and an 84% chance of a moderate El Niño. This prediction comes after an unusually long La Niña event lasting three years came to an end earlier this year. This was linked to catastrophic flooding in South-east Asia and Australia, particularly in Pakistan, where flooding displaced around eight million people, as well as the most severe drought in recent history in the Horn of Africa, which has left millions of people displaced and at risk of starvation.

Impacts of El Niño

Though the effects were originally thought to be localised to the coastal regions of Peru and Ecuador, it is now known that the impacts of El Niño, as well as its cooler counterpart La Niña, are global and have been linked to crop failures, increased wildfire frequency, increased flood risk, heightened concurrent drought frequency, disruptions to fisheries, increased civil conflict and higher disease risk in various regions of the world.

El Niño and climate change

The occurrence of extreme El Niño and La Niña events has increased since the 1960s, and climate projections suggest the frequency of extreme ENSO events will increase in the future.3The IPCC AR6 WGI report states that “a robust increase in ENSO rainfall amplitude [used for defining extreme El Niños and La Niñas] is found particularly in SSP2‑4.5, SSP3‑7.0, and SSP5‑8.5… The changes in ENSO rainfall amplitude in the long-term future (2081–2100) relative to the recent past (1995–2014) are statistically significant at the 95% confidence [level]”.While climate models do not show consensus regarding changes in ENSO sea surface temperature variability, models that simulate extreme ENSO events do show large agreement. Some projections suggest a doubling of extreme El Niño events as global temperatures continue to rise.4The future period in the study included projections until 2090. CP El Niño events are expected to become more frequent with climate change, while EP events are projected to become more extreme. 

During the second half of the 20th century, various changes to the behaviour of ENSO were observed, including: 

  • An increase in the occurrence of CP El Niño events   
  • Increased frequency of more extreme El Niño and La Niña events  
  • Increased variability of both CP and EP ENSO events  
  • Changes in the origin of both CP and EP ENSO events since the 1970s from the western Pacific to the central and eastern Pacific. 

As ENSO is a naturally highly variable phenomenon, determining whether the characteristics of ENSO events since the 1950s are the result of human-caused global warming, or simply a reflection of this inherent variability, is not straightforward, partly because sea surface temperature records before 1950 are sparse and unreliable.5In the IPCC AR6 WGI report it states that “there is medium confidence that both ENSO amplitude and the frequency of high-magnitude events since 1950 are higher than over the period from 1850 and possibly as far back as 1400”. Estimates using paleoclimate proxy data – which can be found in coral fossils and tree rings, for example – suggest that ENSO variability intensified by around 25% during the latter part of the 20th century compared to pre-industrial times.6Paleo-reconstructions typically have large uncertainty. A study published earlier this year estimates that human-caused warming has led to approximately one additional CP El Niño event and two additional extreme El Niño events since 1980. Despite the uncertainties, there is a growing consensus that human-caused warming is at least partly responsible for the changes in ENSO variability since the 1960s.

Record high sea temperatures in April this year may also worsen the upcoming El Niño event. We are likely to see record-breaking temperatures with this year’s El Niño, which is occurring against a backdrop of a warming earth – the last eight years were the world’s hottest on record. The hottest of these was in 2016 during one of the strongest El Niño events on record, which saw unparalleled coral heat stress in the world’s oceans resulting in extensive coral bleaching and die-off. ‘Pulse heat stress’ events, such as El Niño, may compound climate change-related stresses on humans and other organisms, with potentially irreversible consequences.7For instance, the 1982/1983 ​​El Niño event led to the possible extinction of a coral species in Panama.

It is more likely than not that global average temperatures will temporarily exceed 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels for the first time in human history between 2023 and 2027.8A 66% chance of exceeding 1.5°C for one year, according to the World Meteorological Organisation’s Global Annual to Decade Climate Update. It is unlikely (33% chance) that the 5-year average temperature will remain above 1.5°C between 2023 and 2027.  During an extreme El Niño event, an extra 0.2°C could be added to the average temperature of the earth on top of elevated temperatures due to global warming. The first year that we see average temperatures exceed 1.5°C could be during El Niño. While this would not mean that the Paris Agreement target has been transgressed, it is a reminder that we are getting closer to this threshold.9Breaching the Paris Agreement target of 1.5°C of warming since pre-industrial times – a threshold seen as important for limiting the impacts of climate change on people and nature – would require several decades of average temperatures above 1.5°C.  

Countries and ecosystems are already experiencing climate change-induced impacts, such as heatwaves, droughts and floods, and El Niño is likely to make these impacts worse. It has also been suggested that continued global warming is making it increasingly difficult to predict El Niño events.

Regional impacts

Predicting whether an El Niño event will occur, or how intense it will be, is challenging, mainly because predictions need to consider changes in both the Pacific Ocean and the atmosphere. While the characteristics of every El Niño event are different, our understanding of ‘teleconnections’ – whereby a climatic pattern, such as El Niño, is correlated with weather patterns elsewhere in the world – can be used to make predictions about the possible impacts. The figure below shows the typical weather impacts of El Niño across the world.

Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Africa

In East Africa, El Niño conditions tend to result in wetter ‘short rains’ (the second rainy season in November and December), which can cause flooding. There is also a strong link between the Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) – the Indian Ocean counterpart of El Niño and La Niña, in which there is a difference in sea surface temperatures between the western and eastern Indian Ocean – and El Niño. When there is a positive IOD and EP El Niño, wetter short rains are amplified. 

In southern Africa, drier than average conditions are expected under El Niño, resulting in decreased maize yields, while the opposite is anticipated in East Africa. In Kenya, the higher rainfall associated with the 2015-2017 El Niño cycle increased maize production by 17%, while drought conditions in southern Africa during the same period reduced maize yields by up to 50%, caused the death of around 634,000 cattle, and resulted in more than 20 million people needing humanitarian aid. By contrast, wheat yields in South Africa may benefit from El Niño. 

During and after El Niño events, cholera incidence has been found to increase threefold in El Niño-sensitive areas in East Africa due to higher rainfall.

India

For India, El Niño tends to weaken the monsoon rains and produce drier conditions, and experts warn that when an El Niño event follows from a La Niña year – as is the case in 2023 – the monsoon rains may be particularly low.10Though this is dependent on various factors, such as lower Eurasian snow cover, which creates warmer conditions on the subcontinent, thereby bringing more rain to India. An assessment of rainfall trends over 132 years in India shows that severe droughts in the region have always been during El Niño years. Additionally, a CP El Niño event impacts the monsoon more than an EP event, but if an EP event occurs, there is also a higher possibility of a positive IOD occurring, which brings drier conditions to the eastern Indian Ocean (in the region of India) but wetter conditions to the western Indian Ocean (in the region of eastern Africa).

Southeast Asia

In Java, Indonesia, El Niño tends to decrease rainfall. Decreased rainfall during El Niño periods has been linked to increased forest fires in Indonesia and reduced rice yields on Java. where more than 50% of the country’s rice is grown. Fires in Indonesia are more intense and prolonged under an EP El Niño, and southern Kalimantan has experienced more intense fires than southern Sumatra under all El Niño events. However, fires are shorter and less intense during El Niño phases when the IOD is negative or weakly positive.     

In the Philippines, El Niño is associated with a decrease in average rainfall and elevated drought conditions, particularly during December to May. The associated water shortages may negatively impact agricultural production in the region – the 2015/2016 El Niño event cost USD 327 million in agricultural production losses. In China, El Niño is linked to higher wintertime air pollution due to southerly winds that encourage the accumulation of particulates.

Europe

El Niño winters are associated with wetter conditions in southern Europe and colder, drier conditions in northern Europe.

Australia

In Australia, El Niño is expected to bring higher temperatures and fire risk, and lower rainfall. Australia is warming faster than some other regions on earth – being 1.4°C warmer than it was during pre-industrial times – potentially making it particularly vulnerable to the effects of El Niño.

North America

In the Northern US and Canada, El Niño is associated with warmer conditions, whereas in the southern US and northern Mexico, wetter, cooler conditions with increased flooding risk are expected. El Niño weakens Atlantic hurricane activity but increases Pacific hurricane activity. 

El Niño may reduce wheat yields in the US as well as maize yields in the southeastern US, while soybean yields may increase.  

South America

El Niño typically brings heavier rains and flooding risk to Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay, A CP El Niño brings drier conditions to the tropical Andes and northern South America, but wetter conditions to southeastern South America and the Peruvian Amazon. An EP El Niño is linked to higher rainfall in Ecuador and Peru and dry conditions in northeastern Brazil, the Amazon Basin and the Andean Plateau. Specifically, an EP El Niño is associated with reduced rainfall in northern, eastern and western Amazonia, with significant impacts on water and carbon cycling – whereby carbon atoms are cycled between the atmosphere, organisms and minerals on earth. During EP El Niño events, lower rainfall occurs across all seasons in the Amazon, turning the Amazon into a net carbon source as trees dry out and slow their growth. During CP El Niño events, reduced rainfall is only observed during the summer wet season. Increased drought may drive forest fires and biome transformation in the Amazon. Warmer, drier conditions in Colombia during El Niño have been linked to outbreaks of dengue fever and malaria.

El Niño may positively affect maize production in Argentina and Brazil, soybean and rice production in Brazil, and wheat production in Argentina due to cooler and wetter conditions. In Mexico, El Niño could reduce maize and wheat output.

  • 1
    CP El Niño events are also referred to as “El Niño Modoki” and “warm pool El Niño”.
  • 2
    EP ENSO has stronger El Niño events compared to La Niña events, whereas CP ENSO has stronger La Niña events compared to El Niño events.   
  • 3
    The IPCC AR6 WGI report states that “a robust increase in ENSO rainfall amplitude [used for defining extreme El Niños and La Niñas] is found particularly in SSP2‑4.5, SSP3‑7.0, and SSP5‑8.5… The changes in ENSO rainfall amplitude in the long-term future (2081–2100) relative to the recent past (1995–2014) are statistically significant at the 95% confidence [level]”.While climate models do not show consensus regarding changes in ENSO sea surface temperature variability, models that simulate extreme ENSO events do show large agreement.
  • 4
    The future period in the study included projections until 2090.
  • 5
    In the IPCC AR6 WGI report it states that “there is medium confidence that both ENSO amplitude and the frequency of high-magnitude events since 1950 are higher than over the period from 1850 and possibly as far back as 1400”.
  • 6
    Paleo-reconstructions typically have large uncertainty.
  • 7
    For instance, the 1982/1983 ​​El Niño event led to the possible extinction of a coral species in Panama.
  • 8
    A 66% chance of exceeding 1.5°C for one year, according to the World Meteorological Organisation’s Global Annual to Decade Climate Update. It is unlikely (33% chance) that the 5-year average temperature will remain above 1.5°C between 2023 and 2027. 
  • 9
    Breaching the Paris Agreement target of 1.5°C of warming since pre-industrial times – a threshold seen as important for limiting the impacts of climate change on people and nature – would require several decades of average temperatures above 1.5°C.
  • 10
    Though this is dependent on various factors, such as lower Eurasian snow cover, which creates warmer conditions on the subcontinent, thereby bringing more rain to India.

Filed Under: Briefings, Extreme weather, Science, Temperature Tagged With: Agriculture, atlantic, Climate models, Climate science, Extreme weather, floods, heatwaves, oceans

About

  • About Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice

Follow Us

Get In Touch:

216
Join Our Newsletters!
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}