Brutal climate-change challenges will put an end to 'magical thinking'
Stop the "magical thinking" and start the proper discussion on how New Zealanders can manage climate-change threats. That was University of Canterbury political scientist Associate Professor Bronwyn Hayward's message to a major gathering of scientists in Christchurch on Tuesday. Speaking at the joint Meteorological Society and Hydrological Society conference, Hayward said relentlessly pursuing economic growth while trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adapt to climate change, would continue to be a major source of friction, particularly among those with their heads in the clouds. She hoped the COP24 meeting in Poland might provide "an end to magical thinking" when it came to keeping temperature rise to the agreed 1.5 degree Celsius level. READ MORE: * Climate change 101: The most important things to understand about this urgent problem * Flooding rivers and rising seas to squeeze West Coast communities * 'Life-altering' changes needed to avoid the worst of climate change * Scientists' estimate of rising costs of climate change could improve planning "But having heard the new secretary-general of the United Nations say at the opening of COP that nothing in these reports, of maintaining it at 1.5C, will affect economic growth, I think we are still living in magical thinking. "Either we accept this is the future we have embarked on for our kids, now, or we accept an amazingly, unprecedented drop is necessary. "So far the national pledges don't get us anywhere near the 1.5C. At present it is more like 3.6C or 3.9C. So if we are going to avoid overshoot, then we are actually going to have to start cutting emissions." It was a shame to realise New Zealand was part of the magical thinking, she said. "At a personal level, I think New Zealand is still deeply engaged in magical thinking. All I've heard about, since returning to New Zealand, is how we can make the emissions trading scheme work better, or how we can plant more trees. "Nothing about how we are actually going to reduce, sector by sector, our carbon and our methane, in particular nitrous oxide, emissions. So, how are we actually going to contribute to the cuts, let alone how we are going to contribute to the cuts and adapt to climate change?" Two communities highlighted some of the real problems facing Kiwis, Hayward said. Kaeo, in the far north of New Zealand, which is prone to floods, and coastal Christchurch, where sea-level rise forecasting has created rebuilding issues. Allowing new homes at Southshore "our most exposed coast" sent an incredible moral-hazard message. "If you want to be really fair, buy them out. But at $790 million to actually buy out the whole of Southshore ... at some point we are going to have to start making really hard decisions about how we manage these communities that ar significantly affected." Scientists were being hamstrung from helping people speak out about making changes, Hayward said. The 2015 Paris agreement had encouraged citizens to ratchet up their obligations to voice concerns. "At the same time, we are saying to scientists, 'you are not to speak out on this, because you don't want to be activists'. Because to present a moral or values-based argument is to be an activist. "Citizens need scientists to explain in simple language, 'are we getting there yet?' "