It becomes clear that the current assessment method and the conclusions drawn from it do not do justice to the dramatic nature of the developments. The long-term assessment leads to the following conclusion:
- The national contribution to radiative forcing is many times higher than the global budget.
- Discussions about the harmful effects of greenhouse gases lead to false conclusions without an assessment of their long-term impact. The aggregation potential of greenhouse gases is just as important as their radiative efficiency. Long-lived and short-lived greenhouse gases differ significantly in this respect.
- Short-lived greenhouse gases from agriculture can be brought to a stable level simply by changing production processes. For long-lived carbon dioxide, however, stabilization requires a (nearly) complete phase-out of fossil fuels. These measures necessitate a complete transformation of economic systems.
This is how young people who have been informed about the content assess the overall context: “Everyone knows that climate change is a huge problem. But who is actually doing anything about it? We humans often tend to ignore problems rather than do something about them, but this is precisely the issue where action is needed, and the energy transition is the prerequisite for that. If we maintain our current lifestyle, things can only get worse until it's too late, if it isn't already!”
Link to the podcast: Climate crisis forever
The full research report is attached:
