Diána Ürge-Vorsatz: Balkan and Mediterranean regions will be the most affected from climate change

Ms. Forsatz, just a week ago scientists announced that in the last 12 months the world has surpassed the mark of 1.5º C above the average temperature of the pre-industrial era. What does this mean?

Unfortunately, this is not good news. It is important to understand, however, that this still does not violate our primary climate target of a degree-and-a-half. With the Paris Agreement in 2018, we committed to try to keep the global temperature increase from pre-industrial levels below two degrees, and, ideally, as close as possible to one-and-a-half. That's why we pay so much attention to these magical numbers. It is important to understand that weather and climate are very variable. Therefore, even if we have crossed this threshold for 20 months, it does not mean that we have lost our climate goal.

We measure this climate target as a 20-year average, as temperatures can vary widely over the years. That is why we are talking about a long-term average temperature, which is the real warming. Now that 20-year average temperature is at the 1.28º C stage, not even 1.3º C yet. The good news is that we still have a little more to reach 1.5 ºC.

This is a very important signal to politicians. Bulgaria welcomes more than 500 scientists from the IPCC very soon. What does this mean for Bulgaria and for the IPCC itself?

This is a truly amazing opportunity for Bulgaria to host the most prominent scientists working on climate change. In Sofia, there will be the so-called IPCC plenary meeting, a decision-making meeting for the preparation of two very important reports on urban climate change and short-term climate drivers. This means that all countries that are members of the IPCC - or the majority of them - will be in Sofia.

For Sofia, this is important because for a long time the organization has been dominated by scientists from several very powerful Western European countries. Eastern Europe was more often absent and silent, or simply much less active. Therefore, when I was elected Vice-President of a working group in the IPCC, it was one of my most important personal missions to try to increase the participation of scientists from Eastern Europe. This is also an opportunity for us to connect with Bulgarian scientists and the society that forms climate policies.

Do you think politicians underestimate the role of scientists, can you give good and bad examples?

I'll start with the good examples. Throughout its 30-year history, the IPCC has been a very influential organization. After our first report, the UN Framework on Climate Change was formed. After the third report, the Kyoto Protocol was concluded, and after the fifth report, the 2018 Paris Agreement was signed to hold climate change to the 1.5º C threshold, which was a real miracle. It is important to know that, at the time, many scientists were actually skeptical. They claimed that it was impossible, too expensive, and there were many reservations in this regard.

Our message was that it is possible. It won't destroy economies. A pandemic affected GDP much more than these efforts. But we need a significant change in business as usual now.

To achieve it, we would need to move to zero emissions by mid-century relative to 2018. Just three years later, in 2021, many countries already had net zero emissions targets in place. Of course, these are only political goals, but it's a huge shift in policy making, given that we didn't even want to unanimously admit that climate change is happening.

Suddenly, India, China, the USA - the big emitters, but also all developing countries and skeptical countries agreed to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060-2070. But this is also normal - well-developed countries achieve the goal earlier, whereas developing countries all fell into line later.

You have already mentioned that one of the most important reports, the scope of which will be discussed, is that of cities. What are the working measures for climate adaptation in cities?

It is very important for cities to change their design - most green spaces and trees in cities can have a huge impact on, for example, a heatwave. We are having a terrible heatwave at the moment, but if we take measures against urban heat islands we will deal with the effect somewhat.

The biggest question is how to find funding for this massive transformation. Therefore, the IPCC Special Report on Cities will give policymakers a much clearer perspective. They need to look for solutions now to make cities better to live in. This will help significantly to achieve climate goals.

Paris, for example, started a very serious fight against traffic and managed to limit it with the introduction of low emission zones. It improved access to many areas by bike, and built thousands of kilometers of cycle lanes, which means that a large part of the traffic switches from cars to bicycles. Many other cities are closing down central areas and banning cars, also improving public transport and providing more alternatives. This makes these urban areas more economically attractive. Many establishments, shops, restaurants are built in these areas and tourists return to the cities.

What do people not know about climate change?

Individual action is important, but if we try to change our lifestyles alone, it will only affect 5% of emissions. Therefore, we need a systemic change that would make it easier for us to change our way of life. But to have it, we have to want it.

Thinking about our individual consumption - whether we take a plastic stirrer or not is important, but it is more important when we vote to think about who we want to work for, whether the politicians have proper plans and also to know when it's best to protest. Let's not forget that each of us is an influencer. We create patterns of behavior even when we choose where and how we choose our vacation. The role of the profession of each of us is also important. Everyone can make an impact in their daily work.