We need a global climate risk assessment!

0 views

Skip to first unread message

H simmens

unread,

Feb 26, 2026, 3:15:27 PM (13 days ago) Feb 26

to healthy-planet-action-coalition, Planetary Restoration

A paper just published today co-authored by Simon Sharpe, the author of the brilliant book Five Times Faster argues what is urgently needed is an authoritative international assessment of avoidable climate change risks.

For those thinking well what about the IPCC the authors argue that they do not conduct risk assessments - they conduct scientific assessments and that is very different.

Mike MacCracken has been making this case for a long time now.

This need for an assessment supports what I said in my recent email where I gave my reasons why I could not support the Open Letter recently circulated on this list.

One of the key reasons is that in my judgment the testing of SRM is highly unlikely to occur on any kind of systematic coordinated and iterative process as it urgently needs to unless two things occur.

There needs to be an authoritative assessment that concludes that SRM is required - as long as it can be shown to be safe and effective as the HPAC Mission articulates - to prevent catastrophic climate outcomes (while most if not all of us here accept that statement without reservation much of the rest of the world does not).

There also needs to be a governance mechanism with sufficient scope, scale and authoritative leadership to overcome the intense and successful opposition that has occurred when atmospheric testing however modest is attempted.

I posted very recently that DSG has announced an effort to begin to create governance on a voluntary basis with the idea that ARIA will join with it thus marrying influential NGO’s with an influential government agency which supports SRM testing.

I’m also quite pleased that this paper makes the case that an international authoritative assessment of climate chain risks is required as astonishingly none exists at the moment.

The paper is behind a payroll but the opening paragraphs are accessible.

We should all do everything we can to demand that these two essential pieces be put into place asap.

From the paper:

“Without a clear view of what is at stake, it is difficult — or even impossible — to make a successful case for proportionate action on climate change. Yet, astonishingly, there has never been an internationally mandated global assessment of climate-change risks.

Global assessments made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have played, and continue to play, a crucial part in assessing the evidence about climate change. But the IPCC produces science assessments rather than risk assessments. Its main focus has been to set out what is known with the greatest confidence. A climate risk assessment offers different information — it makes clear the scale and severity of risks, to inform judgements about the priority to be given to avoiding or mitigating them1.”

We need a global assessment of avoidable climate-change risks

nature.com

Herb Simmens

Author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future

“A wonderful achievement, a SciencePoem, an Inspiration, a Prophecy, also hilarious, Dive in and see"

Kim Stanley Robinson

@herbsimmens

rob...@rtulip.net

unread,

Feb 26, 2026, 3:44:39 PM (13 days ago) Feb 26

to H simmens, healthy-planet-action-coalition, Planetary Restoration

Herb, with great respect I find your reasons for not signing the letter drafted by Mike and Ron to be ridiculous and disappointing.

As I pointed out to you, the letter does in fact address your call for governance first. Your response that it is not prominent enough does not stand up.

On the need for an authoritative assessment, the letter obviously serves to promote that, so your boycott is rather idiosyncratic and unhelpful.

I hope you can reconsider and sign the letter. Your voice is important.

Best Regards

Robert Tulip