O Discurso Nobel de Rajendra Pachauri

O discurso de Rajendra Pachauri, que preside o IPCC, proferido ontem em Oslo durante a cerimónia de atribuição do Prémio Nobel da Paz pode ser visto aqui em formato vídeo. Destaco estes dois excertos:

Paz e Alterações do Clima
"Peace can be defined as security and the secure access to resources that are essential for living. A disruption in such access could prove disruptive of peace. In this regard, climate change will have several implications, as numerous adverse impacts are expected for some populations in terms of:

- access to clean water,
- access to sufficient food,
- stable health conditions,
- ecosystem resources,
- security of settlements."


A necessidade de agir já (short window of time)
"A stabilisation level of 445–590 ppm of CO2 equivalent, which corresponds to a global average temperature increase above pre-industrial at equilibrium of around 2.0–2.4 ºC would lead to a reduction in average annual GDP growth rate of less than 0.12% up to 2030 and beyond up to 2050. Essentially, the range of global GDP reduction with the least-cost trajectory assessed for this level of stabilisation would be less than 3% in 2030 and less than 5.5% in 2050. Some important characteristics of this stabilisation scenario need careful consideration:

- For a CO2-equivalent concentration at stabilization of 445–490 ppm, CO2 emissions would need to peak during the period 2000–15 and decline thereafter. We, therefore, have a short window of time to bring about a reduction in global emissions if we wish to limit temperature increase to around 2oC at equilibrium.

- Even with this ambitious level of stabilisation the global average sea level rise above pre-industrial at equilibrium from thermal expansion only would lie between 0.4–1.4 metres. This would have serious implications for several regions and locations in the world.

A rational approach to management of risk would require that human society evaluates the impacts of climate change inherent in a business-as-usual scenario and the quantifiable costs as well as unquantifiable damages associated with it, against the cost of action. With such an approach the overwhelming result would be in favour of major efforts at mitigation."