Climate

What's the difference between 1.5°C and 2°C? What are "negative emissions"? What's the problem with geoengineering? Why and how is the Heinrich Böll Foundation working on the topic of geoengineering and the 1.5°C limit? Answers to the most frequently asked questions about the 1,5°C target and the topic of geoengineering.

REDD+ was praised as a tool that could quickly and cheaply reduce emissions. This prediction has not been fulfilled. Instead, global emissions and deforestation are increasing.  

The IPCC Special Report on 1.5 opts for a rigorous interpretation of the 1.5 limit on global warming. It has good reasons to do so: "Overshooting" that target risks irreversible impacts and damage for societies and ecosystems, and increases reliance on unproven, high-risk geoengineering technologies.

This dossier aims to give a broad overview of exciting new and old pathways towards a climate-just 1.5°C world. Pathways that are grounded in radical, social and environmental justice-based agendas for political change.

On paper, almost every government in the world is committed to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and keeping global temperatures limited to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. But too many governments, parroting the oil and gas industry's misleading claims, are actually supporting the expansion of fossil fuel production.

An international conference on negative emissions highlights extent of trade-offs and reinforces urgency of near-term emission reductions. A conference report.

While energy giants like Exxon and Shell have drawn fire for their roles in warming the planet, the corporate meat and dairy industries have largely avoided scrutiny.

In 2016, global spending on oil and gas projects was more than double the total spent on renewables. This imbalance can only be tackled by restructuring the mechanisms.

Geoengineering technologies are not yet deployable globally, but support for them is advancing fast, thanks to backing by powerful advocates eager to start experiments. But no silver bullet for climate change exists, and we must not abandon proven methods for the sake of a promise that one will be found.

The Paris Agreement has set an ambitious goal to prevent global warming from spiraling out of control. But it has also set the stage for what will form the subject of numerous heated debates in the coming years. This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy. Open external content on original site This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy.

The food that we eat plays a big role in the search for solutions to climate change. Agriculture is one of the major contributors of greenhouse gases. But the way we farm our land can also be a big part of the solution. This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy. Open external content on original site This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy.

Compared to COP21 where the EU had a decisive bridge-building role between developed and developing countries in leading a strong climate coalition, in Marrakesh Europe appeared silent and divided.

At the UN’s COP 22 climate conference in Marrakech, the international community closed ranks despite (or perhaps because of?) the election of Donald Trump as the next U.S. president.

Heads of state and government of all UN member states negotiated in the most comprehensive consultation process of the UN’s history so far, about the most urgent questions concerning the future. 17 goals of the "Agenda 2030" shall be implemented by 2030.

The G20 uses the term “Green Finance” as a broad umbrella term that refers to the major shift in financial flows required to support projects that benefit the environment and society by reducing pollution or tackling climate change.

Marrakech was never going to write history on loss and damage in the same way that Paris did in 2015. Whilst the progress made in the Paris Agreement was tangible at Marrakech, rich countries didn’t allow a real breakthrough yet. The Marrakech talks did, however, lay some groundwork for future progress.

Last December in Paris, 196 governments agreed on the need to limit global warming to 1.5°C. But political constraints are causing some to advocate solutions that will do more harm than good.