The American financier does not believe that we will be able to avoid a climate disaster – according to bank reports such as Morgan Stanley, JPmorgan and other financial institutions.
Mention of these assumptions regarding progress climate change have these institutions, appeared not only in climate reports, but also other, not necessarily broadly announced documents. As the portal describes scientificamerican.comfor example, Morgan Stanley (one of the largest investment banks in the world), this year issued an indistinct report on the future of the room air conditioning industry. And in it there is a shocking from the point of view of the climate – and our future – the statement that in view of the latest complications for climate policy, the bank “expects temperature rise by 3 degrees Celsius”.
In a statement for “Guardian“The company's representative stated that in the reports they do not present” decisive views “, but an analysis of evidence provided by scientists and experts.
In another analysis From this year, the large banks of the Institute of International Finance (IFM) wonders whether it is possible to “keep” the purpose of stopping temperature at 1.5 degrees Celsius. This limit comes from the Global Paris Agreement, signed in 2015, in which virtually all countries of the world agreed to act to reduce global warming well below 2 degrees, preferably – at 1.5 degrees.
This year, US President Donald Trump decided that the United States – the largest economy in the world and historically the largest emitter of greenhouse gas – leave the agreement. And IFM wrote in the analysis that the 1.5 degree limit “is certainly unattainable”, that the world is not even on the road to stop insulation at 2 degrees.
In forecasts: disaster
This data cannot be – on the one hand – to be completely amazing. IFM recalls, among others Data on exceeding the level of 1.5 insulation last year (it is still “only one year, not the average earth temperature, but shows that we are approaching this level quickly) and analyzes of current trends of emissions and climate policy. They show that even when the currently planned climatic activities are realized, we will not stop warming until the end of this century, and the temperature will rise by about 2.7 degrees.
On the other hand, politicians (at least those who do anything about stopping climate change) are still officially sticking to the goals of the Paris Agreement. Scientists in the most current reports write that the insulation between 1.5 and 2 degrees is still technically possible. It already requires drastic actions, but it is not impossible.
The media also point out that financial institutions – like other businesses in the US – are trying to adapt to the new political reality. And even if they said a lot about “green finances” until recently, they change the course to Donald Trump to some extent.
Bank reports show that these do not expect that we will be able to take such actions as humanity. However, while in reports financial institutions may forecast the possibilities of earnings in the disaster. Morgan Stanley expects the growth rate of demand for air conditioners to expand twice (the company ensures that it is not about forecasting “benefits” from insulation, but “increased capital allocation” in alleviating its effects). But other companies think about benefits, such as the opening of new sea routes in the place of the outgoing Arctic Ice.
Meanwhile, in fact, this means, above all, fatal consequences for the world.
The banks themselves recall scientific forecasts, according to which exceeding the 1.5 degree limit drastically increases the risk of exceeding the critical points of the climate, including the refraction of the ice cover, extinction of coral reefs and thawing the “eternal” cold. Warming above 1.5 degrees (not to mention 3 degrees) means much more extreme phenomena, such as drought, floods or stronger hurricanes. The heat waves will threaten the lives of people and animals, and some of the world may become too hot to be able to function normal or agriculture there. The increase in sea levels will not only threaten the existence of island countries, but also the safety of cities located on the coasts.
There is no way out?
The prospect of a deepening climate disaster is not due to the fact that matters have completely escaped from our control – but that we do too little about the climate, and instead of going forward, we can start withdrawing climate policy. The Institute estimates that 2024 did not bring drastic changes for global climate policy, but this year we can see a series of steps back.
Analysts point out that despite “significant progress in the implementation of renewable energy and electric vehicles as well as investments in pure energy, subsidies for fossil fuels remain high, eliminating the positive impact of renewable energy sources.” According to the forecasts they cited, global greenhouse gas emissions will reach the peak and stabilize until the end of this decade. But to stop the insulation at a fairly safe level, the emissions cannot remain at the same level – they must fall, and much year after year.
The plans and decisions that will appear at this year's COP30 climate summit in Brazil will be very important. Not only because of the growing emissions and lack of sufficient actions, but also because it will be a test for the world: how it will behave in the face of the United States of Trump, which come out of the climate agreement, and they will unleash the trading war with the rest of the world. Important decisions also face the European Union, which reviews its climate policy and plans their climate goals and activities for the coming years.
The perspective that banks draw in their forecasts is gloomy. But there is something that we can see positively in them: a lot depends on us. Climatic policy delays is not a matter of technology that we cannot cope with (technological solutions in the vast majority of we already have) or nature, which makes us become embellished (on the contrary, nature is our great ally). These are the effects of our decisions, often during the election. We can still change and require that politicians act for our common security in the (not so distant) future.
More activities can also be required from financial institutions, because they decide how, where and on what terms they spend, borrow and invest money. And they can direct them towards clean technologies instead of further mining of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, Morgan Stanley loosened his own loan rules last year, and described Reuters. And now they allow projects in line with the insulation stop at the level between 1.5 and 1.7 degrees – previously it was no more than 1.5 degrees.