Extreme weather events are increasing: heat waves, heavy rain. Germany is also not spared from disasters that experts attribute to climate change. One climate conference follows the next, but the results remain poor, criticizes meteorologist Mojib Latif. With ntv.de he talks about how humanity could still get the curve.

ntv.de: Mr. Latif, India and Pakistan have recently suffered a severe heat wave with temperatures that are life-threatening for people. Is that already a glimpse of a world that is awaiting us with climate change?

Mojib Latif: Absolutely. In my book “Heisszeit”, published in 2020, I had already warned that unchecked climate change would make some regions of the world uninhabitable. And that has already become apparent in the past two years. At the end of June 2021 there was this unbelievable heat wave in western Canada with temperatures up to 50 degrees. Hundreds of people died because of it. Shortly thereafter, the flood disaster in Germany killed almost 200 people. In Germany, we always had the feeling that things like this happen elsewhere. In the meantime, however, many people are realizing that something like this can also happen in this country. We also had the hot summers of 2018 and 2019 with a new heat record of 41.2 degrees. And we are only at the beginning of this development, one must not forget that.

Will humanity be able to stop this development?

I dont know. My current book is called “Countdown”, which means that the climate catastrophe is gradually approaching. So it’s no longer the case that we still have decades to act. No, time is running out. And we just saw it: The World Meteorological Organization’s report, published a few days ago, said exactly that, that we can no longer actually limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. But that was already clear to me in 2015 with the Paris climate agreement. What remains now is the goal of limiting warming to well below 2 degrees. And even that is a formidable challenge.

You don’t think much of climate conferences, you write in your book – because in the end nobody sticks to the agreements made anyway. This year there is another UN climate conference in Egypt, the COP 27. So are the hopes placed in this one in vain?

The climate conferences have one aspect that I like, and that is that public attention is repeatedly drawn to the issue of climate change. But the political will is simply lacking. Not necessarily in Germany, but on a global level. I therefore believe that climate conferences are not effective. If, after more than a quarter of a century of climate conferences, emissions of greenhouse gases are still increasing, then at some point we have to be honest and say: this is not the instrument with which we will get any further.

What do you think would be the alternative?

I have long called for an alliance of the willing. It would be expedient if there were countries that made progress in climate protection. On the other hand, this alliance of the willing must also be so courageous that it sanctions other countries that do not want to take part in some way. Otherwise it doesn’t work. You cannot trade unconditionally with China, which is by far the largest emitter of CO2, accounting for more than 30 percent of global emissions. We must not allow our markets to be flooded with non-sustainably manufactured products from China or other countries.

So products that have a high carbon footprint because they are mostly made with energy from fossil fuels?

Correctly. Products from China would have to be much more expensive, there would have to be customs duties. At least, as long as there is no such thing as global emissions trading or a global CO2 price. In Germany, we have reduced our CO2 emissions by almost 40 percent since 1990. However, China is growing and growing and is always building new coal-fired power plants. It’s a global problem now. Even if we no longer emit any CO2 in Germany, that alone would not be of much use.

Sanctions are often difficult to implement, as can currently be seen in the war in Ukraine. And their guiding effect is controversial. So can they really be the right vehicle to tackle a global problem like climate change that needs everyone to play their part? Wouldn’t they deepen the trenches?

Sure, but I don’t know of any alternative. The climate negotiations are going nowhere. We saw that at the last climate conference in Glasgow when it came to phasing out coal. Who blocked there? China and India. That shows that these countries have absolutely no interest in getting serious about climate protection. China keeps increasing its CO2 emissions. This is also a bad example for countries like India, which also blocked. And 1.3 billion people live in India, with current CO2 per capita emissions at the level of a developing country, just two tons a year. For comparison: in Germany it is almost nine tons, in China over seven. What if India develops in the same way China is fossil-evolving, which it looks like at the moment? That would be the super meltdown.

At the same time, many people in Germany do not understand why emissions should be further reduced in this country while other countries such as China and India are increasing their emissions more and more. What do you tell them?

Of course, there is also something like international justice. I just listed the per capita emissions. You can’t tell an Indian to stick with two tons of CO2 a year and we’re sticking with nine. The other point is historical responsibility. The surface temperature of the earth, which is the focus of international negotiations and climate targets, reacts to the emissions that have been emitted since the beginning of industrialization. In this respect, the old industrial countries are still quite far ahead. So I think the countries that drove the car in the dirt should be the first to pull it out. At the same time, however, we have to put the emerging countries in a position to be able to develop sustainably, on the one hand through technology transfer, but of course also through financial support. And that’s why we also have to give up part of our wealth. I don’t think it’s very much. Let’s not forget that we have a lavish lifestyle. For example, how can it be that we throw away so much food or drive through the cities in huge cars?

If you could give the federal government a tip – which problem would you tackle first in Germany in order to advance climate protection?

If you really want to achieve something, the first thing you should do is eliminate the subsidies for conventional energies. Because then the renewable energies will be unrivaled cheap. Global subsidies for fossil fuels are around 500 billion US dollars annually. They are incredible subsidies and they are about 10 to 20 times higher than those for renewable energy. And that doesn’t make sense. I would therefore abolish the subsidies in Germany. And I don’t just mean coal subsidies, but also the company car privilege or subsidies for hybrid SUVs. That would also have freed up a lot of money, in Germany around 50 to 60 billion euros a year. And when this money becomes available, you can invest it in the expansion of renewable energies.

What gives you hope that humanity will still get the curve when it comes to climate change?

A lot has happened in recent years. Take the penultimate federal election. In the election campaign, the issue of climate change played absolutely no role. In the last federal election campaign, on the other hand, it was one of the most important issues, if not the most important. So you can see that public pressure can make a difference. And that’s why it’s so important that we’re a free country. You can’t do that in China, nor in Russia. Both are autocratic regimes that suppress opinions. Therefore, the democratization of the entire world is a very important point. Another reason for hope is the judiciary. The judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court on the Climate Protection Act last year was an incredibly strong signal for the population, but also for the economy. There are also other important judgments, such as in the Netherlands against the Shell oil company. As President of the Academy of Sciences in Hamburg, I can see that law at the universities is really simmering. And I see that the number of climate protection proceedings in the courts is increasing sharply.

So you see a change in society?

Well, I’m an optimist. And I’m still waiting for a social tipping point that might also be possible in world politics.

You hear a lot about tipping points in the climate system at which exceeding a certain temperature can result in abrupt climate changes. But what is a social tipping point?

A social tipping point also brings about serious changes in a relatively short space of time, albeit in society. This happens when a critical mass in society is convinced, which can then set a tremendous dynamic in motion. We experienced such a social tipping point in Germany during reunification. Now the same must happen worldwide with regard to climate protection. Somehow the world has to realize that it can only be happy if it says goodbye to fossil fuels.

Will this actually happen?

I don’t know that. I vacillate between apocalypse and hope. I am afraid that the damage caused by climate change will continue to increase. And at some point the insight is so great that humanity acts.

Mit Mojib Latif sprach Kai Stoppel