Tag: Climate Challenges

COP15, the UN Biodiversity Conference, took place between 7th and 19th December 2022. This event set out to convene world governments to agree to a new set of goals for nature over the next decade. This will create a framework that sets out an ambitious plan to implement broad-based action to change society’s relationship with biodiversity, ensuring that humanity can live in harmony with nature by 2050. COP15 has been touted as the key turning point in the fight to protect biodiversity, and a vital opportunity for countries to make change.

Biodiversity is declining globally, with the WWF Living Planet Report reporting that trends in the population abundance of mammals, fish, reptiles, birds and amphibians have revealed that populations have declined by an average of 69% between 1970 and 2018. Habitat conversion for people and livestock, hunting, exploitation, the intensification of agricultural practices, and the impacts of climate change such as temperature increase, changes to rainfall patterns and increased extreme weather events are among the wide range of challenges wildlife currently faces. Regionally, Latin America and The Caribbean have experienced the worst decline, at 94%. This global decline is set to worsen if no changes are made.  

What were the goals that needed to be set?

The main aim of COP15 was to reach a set of goals and targets that would create a comprehensive and equitable framework agreed upon by world governments. These clear targets need to address over-exploitation, pollution, fragmentation and unsustainable agricultural practices, and be matched by the resources needed for implementation. There also needed to be a plan that safeguarded the rights of indigenous peoples, recognising their contributions as stewards of nature. Finally, the finance for biodiversity needed to be addressed, particularly relating to the alignment of financial flows with nature to push finances towards sustainable investments and away from environmentally harmful ones.

The Deal

An agreement was reached on Monday 19th December 2022. Almost 200 countries agreed to the new set of goals and targets that aim to “halt and reverse” biodiversity loss by the end of the decade. Six items were adopted at COP15:

• the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)
• A monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal GBF
• Mechanisms for planning, monitoring, reporting and review
  
• Capacity-building, development, technical and scientific cooperation
• Resource mobilisation
• Digital sequence information on genetic resources.

It is hoped that measurable targets within the Kunming-Montreal GBF, and a mechanism for implementation, will ensure it will succeed where previous targets have not. There are 23 global targets within this GBF for 2030, with 10 ‘milestones’, including ensuring that at least 30% of land and water considered important for biodiversity are protected before the end of the decade. Currently, only 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine areas are protected.

The key targets also include increasing financial resources from all sources, not just governments, to at least $200 billion per year towards supporting biodiversity by 2030; reducing, redirecting or reforming environmentally harmful incentives by $500 billion per year; and reducing the nutrients lost to the environment by at least 50%, pesticides by at least two thirds and eliminating plastic waste from entering the environment entirely.

The digital sequence information target refers to genetic sequence data, derived from the natural world. This is used in medicine and science, for vaccines, biofuels, crop improvements and further research. The target would require that the benefits arising from this information be shared fairly and equitably.

Are they effective?

Many are labelling the goal of taking urgent measures by 2030 as a strong call to action, with many 2030 milestones listed in the final agreement, including reducing extinction risk by 20%. This would then be reduced tenfold by 2050. This, however, would mean many species are still likely to go extinct during this time, particularly specialist species that occupy narrow niches, as these are more likely to be impacted than generalist species that can survive in a wider variety of environmental conditions. Reducing the diversity of species within an ecosystem can reduce its resilience against other stressors, such as the impacts of climate change, disease and habitat degradation. This is known as biotic homogenisation, where ecological communities become increasingly similar due to a combination of the extinction of native species and the invasion of non-native species.

The target of protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030 is hailed by many as the main success of the conference. This large increase in protected areas, especially with the requested focus on areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, will have a significant impact on biodiversity loss. However, some are describing the milestone of conserving at least 30% of land and sea by 2030 as a ‘floor, not a ceiling’, suggesting that 50% is an important step to the long-term survival of both biodiversity and humanity. This is the key aspect of the Half-Earth concept, developed by biologist E. O. Wilson, which states that the only solution to the upcoming ‘Sixth Extinction’ is to increase natural reserves to cover half the surface of the earth.

Additionally, there is no target for increasing species population abundance by 2030, with details on enlarging the area of natural ecosystems by at least 5% being removed after earlier drafts. While many of the other targets will most likely lead to an increase in species population abundance, and perhaps even in increasing the area of natural ecosystems, the lack of a set target makes it harder to hold governments to account.

Another item that has notably been missed is the issue of dietary consumption, beyond reducing general overconsumption. Research has shown the consumption of meat, particularly beef, is specifically linked to biodiversity loss, with 30% of biodiversity loss linked to livestock production. Reduction of meat consumption is not mentioned in the text of the COP15 agreement, despite research suggesting that beef consumption needs to fall by 90% in western countries to prevent the future impacts of climate change.

Research has also shown that over £1.48tn ($1.8tn) of environmentally harmful subsidies are being paid each year, going towards high-emission cattle production, deforestation and pollution. One of the Aichi biodiversity targets, discussed later in this article, was to remove these subsidies, which governments failed to achieve by 2020. This new target, which requires governments to redirect or reduce these subsidies by at least £416bn ($500bn) per year is a major opportunity, and is recognised as another major outcome of this agreement. However, this still leaves over £1tn ($1.3tn) in environmentally harmful subsidies each year, continuing to put pressure on global biodiversity.

Additonally, the COP15 agreement calls for businesses to assess and disclose how they impact and are impacted by nature loss, but it is not mandatory, which weakens this target. This is unlikely to effectively hold large corporations to account, though societal pressure may play a role in encouraging many countries and financial firms towards disclosures.

This all suggests that, while meeting these targets will put the world on the right track towards halting and reversing biodiversity loss, there is still much more that is needed to be done to create a ‘nature-positive’, more harmonious future. These targets need to be a starting point rather than an end goal.

Can we rely on these promises?

The previous strategic plan for biodiversity for the 2011-2020 period included the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, agreed upon at COP10 in 2010. However, by 2020, the Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 Report by the UN showed that the world failed to meet any of the targets.  There were 20 targets agreed upon, which were separated into 6o elements, to aid in monitoring overall progress. In 2020, only seven of these elements were achieved, with 38 showing progress and 13 with no progress at all. Two had unknown progress. This resulted in six Aichi targets being partially achieved, such as those on protected areas and invasive species. This failure to meet the previous set of targets does not bode well for any confidence in the seriousness of the commitment of world governments to meet these new ones.

The new financial targets, widely hailed as one of the main successes of COP15 will make a huge difference in halting and reversing biodiversity loss but only if they are actually achieved. In 2009, developed countries committed to supplying $100 billion per year by 2020 to help vulnerable countries impacted by climate change. However, these rich nations failed to meet the long-standing pledge. Instead, $83.3 billion was provided in 2020, $16.7 billion short of the target. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) suggested that the $100 billion target would not be met until 2023, using U.N. data processed with a two-year delay. This, again, casts doubt on whether developed countries can be relied upon to follow through with the financial commitments agreed upon at these events.

The other main success of COP15, the goal to protect 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030, also has a failing precedent. In the UK in 2020, the Prime Minister at the time, Boris Johnson, committed to protecting 30% of the UK’s land and sea for nature by 2030. However, so far, according to the 2022 Progress Report on 30×30 in England by Wildlife and Countryside Link, only 3.22% of England’s land is effectively protected and managed by nature, compared to 3% in 2021. There was more progress in protecting English waters, with 8% effectively protected for nature, compared to 4% in 2021.  With very little progress being made and the continued threats of deregulatory proposals to reform or repeal the strongest laws for nature, this calls into question whether the UK will remain committed to these new global goals. Additionally, the newly published environmental targets from The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) are being criticised as a ‘job half-done’ as the goals to ensure greater biodiversity in 2042 than in 2022, and at least 10% more than in 2030, do not go far enough.

However, a proposed EU Nature Restoration Law might be the first step towards achieving these new targets. Should this law successfully make its way through the European Parliament, it would signal that these countries are willing to make the necessary policy changes to stop biodiversity loss. The new law aims to set specific timetables for restoring degraded habitats such as rivers, wetlands, fields and forests. It would cover 1.6 million square miles across the 27 member countries. As the EU’s current environmental laws don’t explicitly state how, when or who needs to restore these areas, this new law is a much-needed addition to ensure proper implementation of conservation. The final vote is expected to take place in June.

Ultimately, world governments and global businesses have made similar pledges before and failed to follow through. Often, while the agreements contain targets that would make significant progress against biodiversity loss, there is a lack of strict regulation of adherence and adoption of policies that would allow for progress towards these targets. While there have been some initial steps that suggest a real commitment to achieving these targets, the next few months and years will be a key time for world governments to prove that they are willing to make the necessary changes.

References and useful resources

The UN page on COP15

The first draft of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

The 23 targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework

Two papers on the impacts of biotic homogenisation

Half-Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for Life by Edward O. Wilson

Research into meat consumption and its connection to biodiversity loss

Research into food systems and environmental limits, discussing the reduction of meat consumption

Research into the amount of environmentally harmful subsidies per year

The Aichi Biodiversity Targets

The world failed to meet any of the Aichi biodiversity targets by 2020 – a news report by The Guardian

The statement by Defra on the final environmental targets under the Environment Act 2021

Information on the EU Nature Restoration Law

The UN Climate Conference COP27 took place in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, from 6th to 18th November. Bringing together over 45,000 people from around the world, the list of delegates included indigenous peoples, local communities, civil society and world leaders, with the aim of delivering solidarity between countries and following through on commitments made in the landmark Paris Agreement.

In this post we’ll take a brief look at some of the outcomes of the conference.

Breakthrough agreement on “Loss and Damage” fund

In negotiations that went up to and beyond the official closing date of the conference, an agreement was finally made to establish a “loss and damage” fund to help those nations most at risk due to the climate crisis. Although many of the details to do with the fund have yet to be ironed out, the money is expected to go to the most vulnerable countries to assist with problems arising from droughts, flooding and other situations caused by climate change.

Commitment to limiting global temperature rise

Although the final agreement of COP27 stated “the urgent need for deep, rapid and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions” and a renewed commitment to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels as stated in the Paris Agreement, there were widespread concerns that there have been no concrete plans to cut fossil fuel emissions since COP26.

The global transformation to a low carbon economy has been estimated to require investments of USD 4–6 trillion per year. This amount would require a complete transformation of financial systems, and concerns were raised that developed countries are not yet showing signs of working together to achieve this.

World Leaders Summit

The World Leaders Summit took place over two days and involved 112 world leaders in six round table discussions. Under the general title “Together for Implementation”, these discussions were intended to break down the steps required to translate commitments into concrete and achievable action. Topics covered by these discussions included:

• Just transition
• Innovative finance
• Investing in the future of energy
• Food security
• Water security
• Climate change and the sustainability of vulnerable communities

The voice of youth at COP27

Children and young people were given much greater prominence at COP27, with governments being encouraged to listen to their thoughts and opinions, and incorporate their ideas in solutions and policies.

The first ever Pavilion for Children and Youth featured a lively programme of discussions, panel events, creative workshops, talks and networking, and provided a dedicated space where the voices of young activists could be heard.

Also new at COP27 was the youth-led climate forum which brought together policymakers with young representatives from the Conference of the Youth (COY17), who presented the Global Youth Statement and highlighted the topics that they wanted raising during COP27 discussions.

Other key outcomes

• The second technical dialogue of the Global Stocktake took place. The Global Stocktake aims to assess collective progress on the implementation of the Paris Agreement. The UN Secretary-General will convene a ‘climate ambition summit’ in 2023, ahead of the conclusion of the stocktake at COP28 next year.

• The Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership was launched, which aims to half forest loss and degradation by 2030 by uniting action by governments, business and other community leaders.

• A USD 3.1 billion plan was announced by the UN Secretary-General which would ensure that everyone on the planet is covered by early warning systems by 2027. This is particularly important for the most vulnerable communities who often have no idea that hazardous weather is on its way until it is too late.

• A 12-month masterplan was drawn up to help make cleaner energies more accessible. Involving 25 collaborative actions to be delivered in time for COP28, the plan aims to speed up decarbonisation within five key areas: power, road transport, steel, hydrogen and agriculture.

---

For information about last year’s COP26, check out our series of blogs on its importance, the first week update and a round up of all the major outcomes from that event and how they could affect our efforts to combat climate change, if countries and businessess stay committed. We also have a series of blogs that look at some of the toughest global climate challenges that we are currently facing.

However, climate change isn’t the only challenge the natural world is facing. Despite world-wide and on-going efforts, biodiversity is deteriorating on a global scale, with the decline projected to worsen if nothing changes. COP15, the UN Biodiversity Conference, is currently underway (7th to 19th December 2022) and aims to agree a new set of goals for nature over the next decade through the Convention on Biological Diversity post-2020 framework process. For more information on this, please check out the dedicated UN webpage.

In the lead up to the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in November of last year, and in the months that have followed, we have been writing a series of articles looking at some of the toughest global climate crisis challenges that we are currently facing. This blog looks at the causes of ocean warming and its impacts on marine ecosystems.

What causes ocean warming?

The ocean acts as a heat sink, absorbing large amounts of heat from our atmosphere and storing it over long periods; the ocean has a central role in stabilising our climate system. This heat is moved and mixed by tides, currents and wave action, allowing the ocean to soak up large amounts of heat without significant increases in temperature. This is changing, however, due to increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases. IPCC data published in 2013 suggested that the ocean has absorbed over 90% of the excess heat generated by greenhouse gas emissions since the 1970s. This is resulting in increased ocean temperatures, with the greatest warming occurring in the southern hemisphere and in the upper 75m of the oceans surface. Average global ocean surface temperatures increased by 0.11°C per decade from 1971 to 2010. This heat sink process has helped limit the rise of global average temperatures but it has serious environmental consequences.

What are the impacts of ocean warming?

Ocean warming has a wide range of impacts on ocean chemistry, habitats, ecosystems and biodiversity, the severity and type of which can vary between habitats depending on their resilience and present biodiversity levels. Combined with other stressors such as pollution, acidification and increased nutrient input, ocean warming can increase the vulnerability of habitats and marine life to other threats such as parasites and disease outbreaks.

Water temperature is a significant environmental stressor, particularly in shallow or nearshore habitats, as they often act as nursery areas for many species. If water temperatures within nursery habitats rise above tolerable levels, they will no longer be suitable, impacting the survivorship, growth and recruitment of the species that use them.

Deoxygenation

Oxygen solubility varies depending on the temperature of the water; warmer ocean water holds less oxygen compared to colder water. Warmer water is also less dense, and rising ocean temperatures leads to increasing ocean stratification, where water is separated into layers. This can act like a barrier and prevents the mixing of water, slowing down ocean circulation and reducing the amount of oxygen reaching deeper waters. It is thought that dissolved oxygen levels have fallen by 2% since the 1950s due to the combined threats of ocean warming and excessive algae growth caused by anthropogenic nutrient input. Areas of low oxygen concentrations have expanded worldwide, with hundreds of new sites reported to be affected and anoxic ocean waters quadrupling in volume since the 1960s. 

Ocean deoxygenation has serious consequences for marine ecosystems and biodiversity, as oxygen is necessary to sustain life for almost all organisms in the ocean. Deoxygenation could lead to a decline in species numbers, diversity and individual growth, resulting in major ramifications throughout the food chain. In ecosystems already vulnerable due to other pressures such as overfishing, deoxygenation could lead to extinctions and even deadzones. Hundreds of millions of people rely on the oceans as a source of food and livelihood; they could be severely affected by a reduction or collapse in fish stocks. 

Warmer waters also increase the oxygen requirement of fish, exacerbating the effects of deoxygenation. There will likely be a shift in the structure of marine ecosystems as more hypoxia-tolerant species, such as jellyfish, will be favoured over less tolerant species, such as large fish and marine mammals. 

Coral bleaching

Corals are marine invertebrates that often have a hard calcium carbonate skeleton. They live in a mutualistic symbiotic relationship with photosynthetic unicellular dinoflagellates called zooxanthellae (endosymbionts), which live in their tissues. They rely on these endosymbionts for up to 95% of their energy requirements. Under certain physiological stresses, such as increasing water temperatures, these endosymbionts can be expelled and the corals turn white without the pigment from the zooxanthellae – this phenomenon is known as ‘coral bleaching’. If the stress continues over an extended period and the coral is not recolonised, the coral will eventually die. Increasing ocean temperatures over the last few decades have resulted in large-scale loss of coral across the world. This has led to degraded coral reef habitats, impacting the ecosystem and species that rely on them. Coral reefs provide food, shelter and spawning grounds for thousands of marine species, therefore the degradation of coral reefs has wide-reaching consequences. 

Habitat loss and range shifting

All species have a thermal tolerance range. Some more generalist species are able to tolerate a broader range, but specialist species occupy a much narrower thermal niche and are therefore more vulnerable to temperature change. Temperature changes can trigger a knock-on effect on ecosystem structures as species migrate into more suitable habitats. The general trends in these shifts are a movement to higher latitudes and deeper locations. 

Many factors affect a species’ capacity to adapt to rising temperatures, including their dispersal ability, thermal tolerances, habitat or resource needs and the community composition of the new potential habitat. If the new area has high levels of pressure from competition, predation or lack of resources, or the species’ dispersal ability is limited (e.g. the species is sessile), successful establishment is unlikely.

Changes in community structure can negatively impact biodiversity, as the loss of whole populations from initial habitats can trigger a cascade of consequences on predator and prey populations, potentially altering entire ecosystems. These range shifts can also impact the communities already present, as new species could lead to increased competition for resources or the arrival of a novel predator that prey species are not adapted to avoid. There will also likely be socio-economic impacts on local fisheries if species move away from traditional fishing grounds.

Range shifting has been recorded in zooplankton, where warm-water species are extending their ranges poleward at a rate of up to to more than 230km per decade. There has also been a corresponding decline in the abundance of cold-water species in these areas. Zooplankton play a key role in many food chains as they are an intermediary species, transporting energy from the primary producers (phytoplankton) they consume to their predators, such as fish and decapods. Therefore, these changes in zooplankton community composition impact whole marine food webs, especially as warm-water species are generally smaller and less energy-rich.

Temperature-dependent sex determination

Some marine species exhibit environmental sex determination, where certain environmental factors can influence the sex of offspring during embryonic or early juvenile development. With increasing ocean temperatures, the proportion of males to females being born could be altered in certain species, leading to biased sex ratios. This can affect reproduction, genetic diversity and potentially population numbers. 

Many fisheries are female-dependant, as female fish tend to grow larger, therefore are more likely to grow to harvestable sizes and can produce a larger yield. Southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma) exhibits sex reversal to males during early juvenile development at both 18°C and 28°C, with the optimal temperature for female development being 23°C. Southern habitats consistently have higher temperatures of over 27°C, therefore producing more male-biased sex ratios, potentially impacting the viability of fisheries operating out of these locations.

Other impacts

Warming ocean temperatures are also thought to be impacting breeding patterns, with many species reproducing earlier. This could lead to an uncoupling of certain predator and prey interactions if migrating predators arrive too late to feed during spawning events. Some species have been found to breed for a shorter duration, such as black sea bass (Centropristis striata) whose spawning season is starting later and ending earlier in the northern parts of their range. This suggests that there may be lower reproduction and recruitment in newly occupied ranges, demonstrating the potential future impact of warming ocean waters on species experiencing poleward-driven range shifts. Migration patterns have also been noted to be affected, with similar potential results.

Ocean warming also reduces the amount of sea ice. The implications of this, such as sea-level rise, coastal flooding and erosion, will be covered in more depth in a future blog post.

What can be done?

As the main driver for increasing ocean temperatures is the increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, the solution is to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond this, we need to protect and restore our marine and coastal ecosystems and manage the other stressors that are exacerbating the impacts of ocean warming. By creating protected areas and restoring degraded habitats, we can create refuges for species and improve biodiversity, which has been shown to increase ecosystem resilience against the impacts of climate change.

By working with fisheries, governments could introduce further policies that work towards sustainability, such as by improving quota limits and reducing by-catch. Many governments and fisheries are already working towards this, but scientific research and accurate data are needed to ensure that population estimates are accurate to prevent overfishing. Steps like these will help to reduce the pressures we place on the marine realm, allowing ecosystems to be more resilient to the effects of ocean warming. 

Scientific research into monitoring ocean warming is also important. Up-to-date and accurate measurements, with local and global monitoring of the rates, trends and effects can help policymakers make rapid and correct decisions to mitigate the worst impacts. Many of the policies signed at COP26 may make a positive difference, as reducing deforestation and methane emissions and adopting policies to reach net zero by 2050 will help to limit ocean warming. However, more can and should be done. 

Summary

• Oceans absorb atmospheric heat, the amount of which has increased due to high greenhouse gas emissions. The greatest warming occurs in the southern hemisphere and the upper 75m.
• Ocean warming has a variety of impacts including deoxygenation, habitat loss, range shifting, coral bleaching and changes to breeding patterns. These various impacts can all have negative effects on marine biodiversity and human livelihoods.  
• As the main driver for marine warming is increased greenhouse gas emissions, the main solution is cutting these emissions. Other solutions include protecting and restoring marine habitats, reducing pressures from other threats such as overfishing and increasing the accuracy and use of scientific research. 

Useful resources:

Duffy, J. E., et al. 2016. Biodiversity enhances reef fish biomass and resistance to climate change. PNAS 113(22): 6230-6235

Honeycutt, J. L. et al., 2019. Warmer waters masculinize wild populations of a fish with temperature-dependent sex determination. Scientific Reports 9(1): 6527

Poloczanska, E. S., et al. 2016. Responses of Marine Organisms to Climate Change across Oceans. Frontiers in Marine Science 3(62): 1-21

Slesinger, E., Jensen, O. P., and Saba, G., 2021. Spawning phenology of a rapidly shifting marine fish species throughout its range. ICES Journal of Marine Science 78(3): 1010-1022

Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014 of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Page 11 

Our previous blog, a round-up of COP26, covering the major outcomes of the event and how they might affect our efforts to combat climate change.

Impact of Climate Changes on Marine Environments
Paperback | October 2016

This book discusses the modifications in marine ecosystems related to global climate changes, including shifts in temperature, circulation, stratification, nutrient input, oxygen concentration and ocean acidification, all of which have significant biological effects.

 

Rewilding the Sea: How to Save Our Oceans
Hardback | June 2022

Charles Clover chronicles how determined individuals are proving that the crisis in our oceans can be reversed, with benefits for both local communities and entire ecosystems. Essential and revelatory, Rewilding the Sea propels us to rethink our relationship with nature and reveals that saving our oceans is easier than we think.

 

Ocean Ecology: Marine Life in the Age of Humans
Hardback | November 2021

This authoritative and accessible textbook advances a framework based on interactions among four major features of marine ecosystems – geomorphology, the abiotic environment, biodiversity, and biogeochemistry – and shows how life is a driver of environmental conditions and dynamics.

 

The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Paperback | May 2022

This special report is the most comprehensive and up-to-date assessment of the observed and projected changes to the ocean and cryosphere and their associated impacts and risks.

 

Climate and the Oceans
Paperback | October 2011

This offers a short, self-contained introduction to this subject, beginning by briefly describing the world’s climate system and ocean circulation and going on to explain the important ways that the oceans influence climate. Topics covered include the oceans’ effects on the seasons, heat transport between equator and pole, climate variability, and global warming.

 

The Great Ocean Conveyor: Discovering the Trigger for Abrupt Climate Change
Hardback | February 2010

Wally Broecker is one of the world’s leading authorities on abrupt global climate change. In The Great Ocean Conveyor, he introduces readers to the science of abrupt climate change while providing a vivid, firsthand account of the field’s history and development. This book opens a tantalizing window into how Earth science is practised.

In the lead up to the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in November of last year, as well as the months that have followed, we have been writing a series of articles looking at some of the toughest global climate crisis challenges that we are currently facing. This post looks at the intensification of agricultural practices and how this can both be exacerbated by and contribute to climate change.

What is agricultural intensification?

Our global population is increasing year on year and is predicted to hit 10 billion by 2057. Agricultural production has to keep pace with the resource demands of this growing population. There are two main ways this can occur: an increase in the amount of land used for agricultural purposes or an increase in the yield from land already used through improvements or increased use of resources such as technology, fertilisers, labour, pesticides or scientific plant knowledge.

What are the impacts of land-use change?

Habitat destruction is considered one of the main causes of animal extinctions worldwide, and much of this destruction is due to clearing land for agriculture. Intensively managed agricultural land is far less valuable for the environment than natural habitats such as wetlands and forests. Intensively managed farmlands support less diverse and abundant species, sequester less carbon dioxide and suffer from increased water loss and soil erosion. Therefore, the increase in agricultural areas can contribute to climate change and worsen our ability to mitigate its effects.

What is the impact of increasing yields?

Intensification of agricultural management practices to increase yield includes an increase in the use of chemicals such as fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides, all of which can negatively impact wildlife, soil and nearby water quality. The artificial introduction of nutrients can be detrimental to the environment, particularly if it reaches waterways through run-off, as it can lead to algae blooms that can deplete aquatic oxygen levels.

Herbicides and pesticides have a direct impact on both target and non-target species, potentially disrupting populations and affecting whole ecosystems. Species can also be impacted through trophic poisoning, as the impacts of these chemicals can be heightened through biomagnification, where toxins build up in the food chain in greater and greater concentrations at each trophic level. This often results in the loss of top consumers which can destabilise ecosystems.

Another way to increase yield is by utilising as much of the existing agricultural land as possible. This, however, reduces the areas of non-crop species, such as trees and hedgerows. These areas represent essential diversity in plant species, helping to support a wide variety of fauna by providing food, shelter and breeding areas. Losing these areas reduces the variety and abundance of species that agricultural land can support. Additionally, crops are often grown in monocultures, a field composed of just a single crop species rather than multiple species, further reducing biodiversity. This increases the susceptibility of fields to disease and pest damage, furthering the need for additional chemical intervention.

Climate change and agricultural intensification

Agriculture is one of the major sources of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. Methane and nitrous oxide, produced from livestock and as an indirect product of fertilisers, are particularly problematic. Increasing production or land area can increase the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere while reducing the amount of carbon that the land can sequester, enhancing the impact on climate change.

Climate change affects agriculture in return. Changes in precipitation patterns impact crop yields and reduce yield reliability. Higher temperatures, particularly heat waves, can lead to high yield losses, livestock death or sickness, a reduction in workable hours, increases in water supply needs and even damage to equipment. More frequent and higher intensity extreme weather, such as storms, can also impact in a similar way. Therefore, agriculture may not be able to keep up with food demands and would need to further increase its production. This could continue to drive climate change and exacerbate the impacts on agriculture in a cycle of detrimental effects.

What are the other options?

One solution is reducing food loss (by food suppliers) and waste (by retailers, food service providers and consumers). It is thought that, globally, around one-third of all food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted every year. This amounts to about 1.3 billion tonnes of food per year. When this is buried in landfills, it is broken down by microorganisms using anaerobic digestion, producing greenhouse gases (specifically methane and carbon dioxide), which are released into the atmosphere. Some countries, however, have begun to set up food recycling centres to capture these gases to be used as a renewable source of biofuel.

By reducing the amount of food wasted, there would be less need to increase agricultural intensification to keep up with the growing population. This can be achieved through several routes, including changing the strict cosmetic standards of many retailers, providing better clarity on food expiration dates and bringing consumers’ attention to how much food they waste each year. For example, through a campaign called ‘Love Food, Hate Waste’, the UK had a 21% reduction in avoidable household waste between 2007 and 2012.

Sustainable farming practices are needed to ensure that global agriculture does not continue to seriously contribute to climate change. Through research into sustainable practices and better techniques, agriculture may be better able to provide enough food for the global population without compromising our environment. By reducing livestock numbers, increasing the efficiency of fertiliser application and better management for manure, the EU reduced agricultural emissions by 24% between 1990 and 2012. Additionally, the UK government is changing how they subsidise farmers. The Sustainable Farming Incentive, piloted by Defra, will reward acts that improve environmental outcomes and reduce carbon emissions. This should hopefully help to increase the sustainability of our agriculture, reducing its impact on climate change.

Another potential solution is regenerative farming, a practice that aims to reverse the impacts of and contribution to climate change by rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded soil biodiversity. This results in an increase in carbon drawdown and an improvement in the water cycle. These farming practices include low- or no-till techniques, increasing plant diversity, introducing cover crops and crop rotations and minimizing physical disturbance. It also includes growing trees and shrubs around crops, using perennial crops that do not need to be replanted annually and creating borders of pollinator habitats. It is hoped that, by restoring the health of soils, farms will be able to increase their yield without negatively impacting the environment, reducing the need for agricultural intensification.

There is a concern, however, that the reduced tilling may lead farmers to rely more heavily on herbicides to remove unwanted plants. There may also be an increased use of fertilisers, to meet the need for nitrogen to convert carbon into microbial organic matter to allow it to remain sequestered in the soil. Questions have also been raised about whether regenerative farming can sequester additional soil carbon effectively, without decreasing yield or requiring more land for farming. For example if cover crops or additional trees and shrubs are added to farmlands without decreasing yield, then carbon sequestration will increase. However, if yield decreases and habitats such as a forest have to be cleared to replace lost production, then carbon sequestration will either remain the same or decrease.

COP26

There were several pledges and agendas launched at COP26 last year, including the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use, which intends to halt and reverse forest loss by 2030, reducing agricultural expansion into forest areas; and the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate (AIM4C), which looks to fund scientific breakthroughs, public and private applied research, and the development, demonstration and deployment of tactical, actionable and innovative products services and knowledge to producers. AIM4C has been criticised, however, for being over-reliant on technological solutions rather than sustainable farming methods. Other announcements including the climate emissions pledges and the Global Methane Pledge will also impact agriculture and its contribution to climate change, as countries look to introduce new regulations and policies to reduce emissions from farms.

The Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture (KJWA) was also discussed at COP26. Originally established at COP23 in 2017, KJWA aims to bring discussions of agriculture into the UNFCCC and address agricultural issues through the lens of climate change. This process was set to end at cop26, but due to many areas of disagreement, the roadmap of how the Koronivia process will be going forward was included in the debate at the next meeting of the UN climate process, the Bonn Climate Change Conference, in June 2022.

Summary

• Agriculture must keep up with the resource demands of an increasing global population. This is mainly achieved through increasing agricultural land or increasing yield. Both have negative environmental impacts and can contribute to climate change.
• Climate change can also negatively impact agriculture, through changing precipitation patterns and extreme weather causing loss of crops and damage to equipment. This, then, requires more agricultural intensification to make up for losses, further contributing to climate change.
• Solutions include more sustainable agricultural practices and reducing food waste. This reduces the impacts of agriculture on climate change while also reducing the need for more agricultural intensification. Other practices such as regenerative farming may help to improve soil health and carbon sequestration but there are criticisms about its effectiveness.
• Several pledges launched at COP26 will impact agriculture and its contribution to climate change, including the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use, the Global Methane Pledge and the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate.

Useful resources:

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ (FAO) 2013 report: food wastage footprint: impacts on natural resources, illustrating how food is wasted or lost through various stages of the supply chain, highlighting the significant environmental costs.

The 2021 policy paper for the Sustainable Farming Incentive, piloted by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra).

This 2015 article by the European Environment Agency on agriculture and climate change.

A 2019 document outlining the National Farming Union of England and Wales’ (NFU) plans for achieving net zero, outlining the current impacts of agriculture and their goals for increasing sustainability.

This 2018 report by IEA bioenergy on anaerobic digestion of food waste for a circular economy, containing food waste data, information on anaerobic digestion systems, and case studies from 11 different countries.

This 2021 article on the key outcomes from COP26 for food, forests, land use and nature by CarbonBrief.

 

Sixty Harvests Left: How to Reach a Nature-Friendly Future

Taking its title from a chilling warning made by the United Nations that the world’s soils could be gone within a lifetime, Sixty Harvests Left demonstrates why food and future harvests matter more than ever and shows us how we can restore our planet for a nature-friendly future.

 

 

Farming and Birds

Ian Newton discusses the changes that have occurred in British agriculture over the past seventy years, and the effects they have had on bird populations. He explains how different farming procedures have affected birds and other wildlife, and how an understanding of the processes involved could help in future conservation.

 

 

Soil Health and Intensification of Agroecosystems

This book examines the climate, environmental, and human effects on agroecosystems and how the existing paradigms must be revised in order to establish sustainable production.

 

 

 

Agricultural Development and Sustainable Intensification

This multidisciplinary book presents state-of-the-art reviews of current SI approaches to promote major food crops, challenges and advances made in technology, and the institutional and policy measures necessary to overcome the constraints faced by smallholder farmers.

 

 

Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture: Greening the World’s Food Economy

This book provides the first widely accessible overview of the concept of sustainable intensification as an innovative approach to agriculture and as a key element in the transition to a green economy.

 

 

Farming with the Environment: Thirty Years of Allerton Project Research

This book examines over 30 years’ worth of research from the Allerton Project, a research and demonstration farm in the UK. Designed to provide guidance, feedback and recommendations to farmers, practitioners and policymakers, the Allerton Project is an exceptionally well-documented case study of lowland agricultural land management which has the purpose of meeting multiple objectives.

In the lead up to the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in November of last year, as well as the months that have followed, we have been writing a series of articles looking at some of the toughest global climate crisis challenges that we are currently facing. This article looks at the increase in frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, their impacts, and how they are affected by climate change.

What are extreme weather events and why do they occur?

Extreme weather events can be split into four categories: geophysical (i.e. tsunami), meteorological (i.e. storms, tornadoes), hydrological (i.e. floods) and climatological events (i.e. extreme temperatures, drought, wildfires). They are usually defined as unusual, unexpected, unseasonal or severe weather. This extreme weather often has a significant impact on us and the environment, causing damage, loss of livelihood and even loss of life.

There is debate as to how much climate change is responsible for our changing weather patterns. There are a variety of causes for extreme weather, including tectonic plate shifts, changes in air pressure or movement, ocean temperatures, atmospheric moisture content, the reflection rate of solar radiation and even the tilt and orbit of the Earth. These are natural variations that cause naturally occurring extreme weather, therefore, the occurrence or even intensity of these events cannot only be blamed on climate change.

How does climate change affect extreme weather events?

Many studies on weather events around the world have connected the increase in intensity and frequency of extreme heat, drought and rainfall to human influence. The picture is more complex for tropical storms (hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones). It is expected that these events will become more intense due to human influences, such as sea-level rise and anthropogenic warming. It is thought that these tropical storms will occur less frequently, however, although there is no consensus.

The increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases due to human activities is causing an increase in average global temperatures. This leads to other impacts, such as glacial and sea ice melting, which is affecting the global ocean circulation. This circulation acts as a conveyor belt, transporting cold water from the poles to the equator and warmer water and precipitation from the tropics back to the poles. A disrupted circulation, for instance due to the weakening of the Gulf Stream, could cause extreme weather events such as far colder winters in western Europe.

Actions such as deforestation can also cause changes in extreme weather events, as removing large sections of forest can impact the movement of water in the atmosphere. This can change precipitation patterns both locally and globally – if occurring on a large enough scale. Increased precipitation can cause flooding, whereas a decrease in rainfall can lead to drought. For more information, check out our previous Climate Challenges article on the local and global implications of deforestation and its relation to climate change.

What are the impacts of extreme weather events?

The damage from extreme weather events to both humans and the environment can be catastrophic. Beyond the direct loss of life, there is an impact on livelihoods, homes and other buildings, roads and infrastructure. The costs of these events can be incredibly high, and it can take years or even decades for areas and countries to recover from the worst of these events. This will only get worse as they become more intense and more frequent, as there will be more damage and less time to recover between events. During February of this year, a series of successive storms, including Dudley, Eunice and Franklin, brought widespread damage, leaving hundreds of thousands without power and millions of pounds in repair and clean-up costs.

Many cities are not built to withstand weather conditions outside of the norm for the area and, therefore, may not have the infrastructure in place to deal with certain extreme weather events. This was evident during the 2021 snowstorm in Texas, United States, where the state’s power supply was not equipped to deal with the record low temperatures. This led to many power outages for over 5 million people, with the total loss of life reported as 210 people.

Environmentally, habitats can be impacted. They can be altered or even destroyed, leading to the extinction of many species that are unable to rapidly adapt, particularly if their distribution is already restricted. It is usually generalist, resilient species that are able to adapt and survive this level of disturbance, therefore specialist species are more likely to become extinct. After a major disturbance event, ecological succession can take place and species recolonise the area. This phenomenon begins with pioneer species, such as plants, lichens or fungi, and the animals that rely on them, before developing in complexity to a stable ‘climax community’. This habitat can be vastly different from the original, depending on the species that survived the original event and those nearby that can recolonise the area. The climax community can also take decades or even centuries to develop, therefore the biodiversity of the area may be reduced or altered for an extended period of time.

What can be done?

Similarly to many of the climate challenges in this series, the solution relies on limiting the rise of global average temperatures. This can be achieved through a combination of methods, many of which were discussed at the COP26 in November 2021. Some of these methods, such as switching to renewable energies and moving towards more sustainable agriculture, are already underway in the UK.

More work needs to be done, however, as even the 1.5°C limit in the rise in global average temperature that the Paris Agreement is aiming for could still have a huge impact on the climate. At 1.5°C, 14% of the world’s population will be exposed to severe heatwaves at least every five years. Rainfall will become more erratic, leading to more flooding, droughts, and reduced water availability. Extreme weather events will be more likely to occur and at a higher intensity.

While the impacts of a 1.5°C rise are thought to be less than those of a 2°C rise, they will still be devastating to many countries and people. And so it is key that countries begin to build resilience against extreme weather, support those most vulnerable and begin to protect and restore habitats. Countries were asked to produce an ‘adaptation communication’ for COP26, outlining what they are currently doing and their future plans to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

COP26 pledges

Following COP26, 90% of the world’s economy is now striving for net zero emissions, with many aiming for 2050; over 100 world leaders signed both The Glasgow Leader’s Declaration on Forest and Land Use and the Global Methane Pledge; and more than 40 countries signed the Coal Pledge, which aims for nations to move away from coal power by the 2030s for major economies and 2040s for developing countries. In addition, multiple countries, companies, philanthropic foundations and international development banks pledged funding to move away from financing fossil fuels and towards renewable energies.

While there are a number of faults with some of these pledges, with criticism over the perceived lack of strict accountability, a peer-reviewed study has found that these new policies could help to keep global warming below 2°C. This will hopefully limit the impact of climate change on extreme weather events, but to keep within the target of 1.5°C, far more needs to be done. The IPCC announced that emissions would need to peak before 2025 and significantly decline by 2030. Read more about the outcomes of COP26 in our blog: Climate Challenges: COP26 Round Up.

Summary

• Extreme weather events are unusual, unexpected, unseasonal or severe weather. They can cause massive damage and destruction to both us and the environment.
• Due to climate change, many extreme weather events may become more frequent and more intense. This will cause more damage and allow less time to recover, potentially pushing both communities and ecosystems beyond the point they can survive.
• The solutions rely on reducing the rise in global average temperatures by reducing the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.
  Even at a rise of 1.5 degrees, the impact of extreme weather could increase. Therefore, a strategy of adaptation and protection for those most vulnerable is needed.
• The policies and pledges signed at COP26 last year may be enough to keep global average temperatures below 2°C, but far more is needed to limit the rise to 1.5°C.

Useful resources:

The COP26 website page on their goal of adaptation: https://ukcop26.org/cop26-goals/adaptation/

NASA’s website on selected findings of the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming, highlighting the impacts of a 1.5°C versus 2°C rise. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-global-temperatures-matter/

Our previous blog on Climate Challenges: What is COP26 and Why is it Important?, covering many of the impacts of an increase in global average temperatures above 2°C and the goals of the UK government.

 

Water Always Wins: Going with the Flow to Thrive in the Age of Droughts, Floods & Climate Change
Erica Gies
Available for pre-order | Hardback | £19.99

 

 

 

Drought, Flood, Fire: How Climate Change Contributes to Catastrophes
Chris Funk
Hardback | £19.99

 

 

 

 

Angry Weather: Heat Waves, Floods, Storms, and the New Science of Climate Change
Friederike Otto
Hardback | £18.99

 

 

 

 

All prices correct at the time of this article’s publication.

COP26, the 26th annual summit of the United Nations Climate Change Conference, has come to a close. This historic event ran from 31st October to 12th November and aimed to secure global net zero emission targets and keep the 1.5°C target within reach. It also discussed the need to adapt to protect communities and natural habitats, mobilising finance and working together to deliver key commitments. For more information on the lead up to this event, what net zero means and the 1.5°C agreement, read our blog: What is COP26 and Why is it Important? We also looked back on the first week of COP26 in our blog: Climate Challenges: COP26 First Week Update. In this article, we discuss an overview of the major outcomes of this event and how they might affect our efforts to combat climate change.

Key outcomes

A number of key pledges were launched and signed during COP26, including:

• 90% of the world’s economy now striving for net zero emissions, with many aiming for 2050.
• The Glasgow Leader’s Declaration on Forest and Land Use intends to halt and reverse deforestation and land degradation by 2030, while also delivering sustainable development and promoting an inclusive rural transformation. This pledge has been signed by over 100 world leaders, covering around 85% of the world’s forests.
• More than 100 world leaders have signed the Global Methane Pledge, a U.S. and EU-led commitment to reduce methane emissions by 30% over the next decade from 2020 levels.
• The Breakthrough Agenda, a global initiative launched by the UK, aims to make clean technologies and sustainable solutions the most economical and appealing option for each emitting sector by 2030, with leaders committing to review progress annually, starting in 2022.
• The Coal Pledge, signed by more than 40 countries, aims for nations to move away from coal power by the 2030s for major economies and 2040s for developing countries.
• A $10.5 billion fund for emerging economies to switch to renewable energies will be supplied by the Global Alliance Group, a group of philanthropic foundations and international development banks. They intend to raise $100 billion in public and private capital.
• Around 450 financial organisations, with a combined market capitalisation of $130 trillion, have agreed to shift their investments away from financing fossil fuel-burning industries and toward “clean” technology.
• China and the U.S. have announced an agreement to work together to cut emissions and help the world stay within 1.5°C by cooperating on key areas, such as cutting emissions from transport, energy and industry.

Are they effective?

Many critics and climate experts are concerned that these pledges will not be enough to keep average global temperatures below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. There are calls for global leaders to do more to meet this goal, as exceeding it will see a worsening in the negative impacts of climate change, potentially putting millions of lives and livelihoods at risk. With countries such as Russia, China, India and Australia refusing to sign the methane pledge, and others, such as the U.S. and China, not signing the coal pledge, it is unclear how successful these agreements will be at tackling climate change. Despite signing the deforestation pledge, Indonesia has stated that it will not halt its developmental growth, which involves cutting forests for new roads and the cultivation of food crops. According to a spokesperson for UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, this pledge does not forbid the cutting down of forests, but rather seeks to end net deforestation – forest loss must be “replaced sustainably”.

Replacing primary forest with new growth has a variety of negative environmental consequences. Primary, undisturbed, ancient forests are often highly complex ecosystems that support a variety of species, including many specialist species, and have an irreplaceable value. New-growth or secondary forest are less able to support the same level of biodiversity, as they may have significant differences in forest structure and species composition. Abiotic factors can vary during development, reducing the area’s suitability for the previous ecosystem. After a major disturbance, it can take decades for an area to develop into a climax community, such as a forest, through ecological succession. During many of these stages, many of the species that previously inhabited the primary forest will be unable to survive, and the community will most likely be made up of more disturbance-tolerant, generalist species that are often of lower conservation concern.

Once the stable climax habitat has developed, even if the new habitat is similar, the community structure may differ dramatically from the original. Certain plant or wildlife species may have been unable to re-establish due to the presence of new species or a reduction in resources, potentially leading to localised extinctions. It is unknown how long it takes for a secondary forest to develop the levels of biodiversity found in primary forests, but it could be several hundred years. Therefore, this form of “sustainable” deforestation might still result in extinctions and reduced biodiversity. These new-growth regions may be far less ecologically valuable than primary forest and, during much of the successional period, store significantly less carbon.

A deforestation policy that focuses on net deforestation rather than halting or severely limiting all deforestation, could potentially help to reduce world carbon emissions by stabilising, or even increasing global forest cover, but this does not address the whole picture. This policy allows for the continued negative ecological impacts of deforestation on biodiversity and vulnerable species, which could ultimately lead to countless extinctions.

Glasgow Climate Pact

Only effective implementation of pledges and tangible action, much of which has not been seen following previous promises of past summits, can ensure the success of COP26. The Glasgow Climate Pact is the agreement reached at COP26 and the first deal ever to explicitly plan to reduce coal. This document initially aimed to clarify and build on the Paris Agreement, proposing that countries agree to accelerate the phasing out of fossil fuels and for developed countries to double their climate finance commitments for funding adaptation. However, many demonstrators throughout the two-week event have called for bolder commitments and stricter accountability to combat climate change, followed by appropriate and effective action.

The first draft of the document was criticised for a variety of reasons, including a lack of financial aid for developing nations and the need for clearer commitments to force countries to increase their emissions cuts. The second draft retained the core demand to return to the negotiating table next year to improve countries’ national emission reduction plans, but included even softer language. COP26 President Alok Sharma stated he was “deeply sorry”, as this final deal shifted from requiring countries to “phase out” coal to “phase down”, a change that has disappointed some. Many now look to the meeting next year that may see further pledges to cut emissions to reach the 1.5°C goal, as an analysis showed that the world is on track for a 2.4°C rise, despite these new pledges.

References and useful resources

A news report on the countries that are now aiming for net zero: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-01-80-world-economy-now-aiming-net-zero-not-all-pledges-are-equal

The COP26 website information on the Glasgow Leader’s declaration on forests and land use: https://ukcop26.org/glasgow-leaders-declaration-on-forests-and-land-use/

A news report on the COP26 deforestation pledge: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59088498

The UK Government’s Press release on the new Breakthrough Agenda: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/world-leaders-join-uks-glasgow-breakthroughs-to-speed-up-affordable-clean-tech-worldwide

The New York Times report of the Global Energy Alliance: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/03/world/europe/global-energy-alliance-fund-cop26.html

The Guardian news report on the Coal Pledge and its criticisms: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/03/more-than-40-countries-agree-to-phase-out-coal-fired-power

Indonesia believes the pledge is unfair: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/05/indonesia-says-cop26-zero-deforestation-pledge-it-signed unfairhttps://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/

Stages of Ecological Succession: https://sciencing.com/stages-ecological-succession-8324279.html

Barlow, J. et al. 2007. Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests. PNAS 104(47): 18555-18560. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703333104

A news report on China and the US’ plan to work together on cutting emissions: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/10/china-and-the-us-announce-plan-to-work-together-on-cutting-emissions

A news report detailing the criticism of the first Cop26 draft: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/10/cop26-draft-calls-for-tougher-emissions-pledges-by-next-year

The draft document, published on 12 November 2021: https://unfccc.int/documents/310987

A news report on the Glasgow Climate Pact: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-59277788

A new report on Climate Action Tracker’s analysis of the potential 2.4°C in global average temperatures: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/09/cop26-sets-course-for-disastrous-heating-of-more-than-24c-says-key-report