'Contraction & Convergence' (C&C) is known as the 'Well Tempered Climate Accord' [WTCA]
An Alliance for UNFCCC-Compliance is built on C&C

 Click logo to return to 'links-page'


Support for C&C, the 'Well Tempered Climate Accord' (WTCA)

After thirty years of increasing failure based on strategy/policy-guesswork
, some are now calling for an Alliance-for-Science.
Does this seek to negate the dichotomies of obstruction, distraction, delay, despair & avoidance crafted by climate-denialism?

Perhaps. Who can say? Science is more about scepticism, perceptions & probabilities & quarrels over the much dreaded 'measurement-problem'.
What's needed is the basis of precaution & equity agreed in 1992 in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Damage & risk rising in proportion to delay in carbon contraction budgeting.

Time is now running out for compliance. An Alliance-for-UNFCCC-Compliance is urgently needed now which embraces 'organic growth'.
But deliberate-obstruction still exploits the expert-ignorance regarding how fast the window of opportunity is now closing for UNFCCC-Compliance.

Global-strategy in a policy-relevant way

Accumulated carbon-debt is huge. It deserves to be dealt with in parallel to remaining budget sharing negotiations.
How to measure in a global-strategy/policy-relevant way the increasing risk exposure we now face.

What is certain is that more guesswork based on the cost/benefit fantasies of 'infinite growth' are anathema to UNFCCC-Compliance.
In proportion to delay, the growth rate of the costs of climate damages overtakes the increasingly 'fake-benefits' of infinite growth.

Global-strategy is based on precaution, equity & organic growth

To counter this and the endless uncertainties of 'guesswork', we should add 'precision' to 'precaution & equity'
knowing the fundamentals of this are simple and need to be based on organic growth & not exponential growth:

A - what full-term total-global carbon-budget is still safe to burn? This is a weight/rate/date calculation & net zero by sooner than 2050 is safer.
B - what is the international basis for sharing this budget so the the shares sum to the same total as the global budget?

A1 - an example is Zero emissions by 2040 = total 140 Gt C or a global average of minus 225 Tonnes-Carbon/sec for 20 years
B1 - sharing is pro-rata or equal per capita or a combination of these two, that still commutes the total with the sum of its parts.


Click left-image below going to zero international CO2 emissions, between 2020 & 2040 [a] pro rata & [b] equal per capita.
There is now relatively little difference between the distributions.

However, there is no difference between the two for being non-random-framework (as opposed to more random-guesswork).

Click right-image below, for a short film of the enormous differences in CO2 emissions relative to the global per capita average over the period 1750-2020.
We're now in a global climate emergency because of this, so we must acknowledge & address this in the need for an Alliance for UNFCCC-Compliance.

Global emissions zero by 2040 2030

Detail of Casino versus Commons below (full detail here)

Zero by 2040

Zero by 2030

Alliance for UNFCCC-Compliance in the light of science XR & the school-strikers

Detail of Climate Debt below (full detail here)