CCB Magazine

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber is one of the world’s most renowned climate researchers. He was an advisor to Angela Merkel, he introduced the idea of tipping points into research, and the Paris climate targets of no more than two degrees of global warming are also attributable to him. Now, at 71, he's moving forward with his latest life's work: the “Bauhaus of the Earth” project to advance ecological architecture. For our new Magazine "The Big Good Future" # 3 we spoke with him about having the courage to be consistent, a possible new government of the climate and what art, culture and politics can learn from research.
 

INTERVIEW   Jens Thomas

CCB Magazine: Mr. Schellnhuber, you are considered one of the world's most influential climate researchers and can look back on a 40-year career as a climate expert. If my calculations are correct, you have a 13-year-old son. Is he already taking part in the Fridays for Future protests?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber: Oh yes, he is indeed - he's a bright boy. However, he is even more interested in political systems and social justice. I'm curious to see what path he will take later on.

CCB Magazine:In 1992, you founded the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), from which you stepped down as director in 2018. It continues to have a decisive influence on science and politics today. You once described PIK as your greatest life achievement. Do you still remember the first steps you took?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:Of course, I do. In 1990, the first report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had just been published. That's when it became clear to some that action had to be taken. Klaus Hasselmann, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics last year as a climate modeller, had suggested at the time that an institute for climate impact research be established. The then Federal Research Minister Heinz Riesenhuber (CDU) brought me to Potsdam in 1991 as the founding director of PIK. At that time, however, man-made climate change was still a rather exotic topic. However, I sensed that it was going to become a major topic of the century. And also, because I advised Angela Merkel in her then function as environment minister from 1994 on, the institute steadily gained influence. We started small, with about 20 staff. Bizarrely, we were based to begin with in the offices of the former Stasi headquarters in Berlin's Normannenstrasse. Fortunately, we were then able to move to Potsdam's Telegrafenberg, where Albert Einstein and other immortals of science used to work. Today, PIK employs more than 300 permanent staff and up to 100 guest researchers in five buildings.

Staying well below 2 degrees will not be possible. But by strengthening carbon sinks through reforestation, reclaiming wetlands and organic architecture we can slowly work our way back into a tolerable temperature range

CCB Magazine:In 2006, Angela Merkel personally appointed you as climate advisor to the German government. To be honest, climate policy achievements have been somewhat disappointing. Did you give the government wrong advice for years, or did they simply not listen to you enough?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:Neither. As a physicist, Angela Merkel certainly understood the issue. But it may well have been her party that put the brakes on doing more. That is the paradox of scientific advice: you can determine precisely what needs to be done on the basis of solid research. But politicians usually look for superficial solutions, because voters would immediately punish the imposition of short-term disadvantages in favor of long-term benefits. And over the years, people have simply not taken tipping points seriously, where drastic changes become irreversible once a certain temperature is reached - these include the ice sheets melting, the Gulf Stream ceasing to flow, or the Indian summer monsoon getting increasingly chaotic. When the financial crisis hit in 2008, the climate issue was off the table anyway. Only now is the problem being recognized across party lines. That's why I have hope that the new government could become a climate government.

CCB Magazine:Oh yeah?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:True, the exploratory paper was full of tortured compromises. But the spirit behind it is an open one. I could imagine some groundbreaking things being set in motion over the course of the legislative period. These include, for example, the inevitable transition to a regenerative, bio-based circular economy. The basic prerequisite for this is a transformation ministry that brings together energy, industry, land use, construction and mobility. The goal of the next government must be climate neutrality by 2040.

Prof. Schellnhuber. Describes himself as one tough Bavarian. He has been researching climate change for 40 years. Photo © Paulus Ponizak.

CCB Magazine:You were one of the first to call for global warming to be limited to a maximum of two degrees. As a member of the German delegation, you played a key role in negotiating the Paris climate targets of 1.5 and 2 degrees in 2015. What hope do you have that the Paris climate targets will still be achieved?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:Staying well below 2 degrees and even below 1.5 degrees seems to me hardly feasible at the moment. To achieve this, we would have to limit the carbon dioxide content in the earth's atmosphere to a maximum of 450 ppm. Global emissions would have to fall to zero well before 2050. The chance of that happening is maybe five percent. I was surprised anyway that the 1.5 degree guard rail was agreed in Paris. That was - understandably - wishful thinking right from the start. Now I’m even assuming that we’re going to overshoot the two degrees. But by strengthening carbon sinks through reforestation, wetland reclamation and organic architecture, we can slowly work our way back into a tolerable temperature range. If nothing is done, the earth's temperature will rise by as much as eight degrees in the next few centuries, and by four degrees by the end of this century alone. In terms of earth history, that would be like living 30 million years ago, with brutal weather extremes and sea level rise in the tens of meters.

CCB Magazine:Mr. Schellnhuber, our issue is called "The Big Good Future". We are looking at sustainability strategies in culture and the creative industries. In your opinion, what role do cultural professionals play in the current climate and sustainability discourse?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:They have to get up out of their easy chairs and say, “We're not going along with this anymore.” And who, if not those working in the arts and culture, can shine a bright light into the dark corners of industrial modernism? For years, I myself have tried to win over art and culture players to the climate debate - without any notable success. Only now is a whole armada setting out to resist climate change. What we need are cross-sector innovations. The transition to a regenerative circular economy is inevitable. The cultural and creative industries can make a decisive contribution to this.

Artists and cultural workers have to get up out of their easy chairs and say: We're not going along with this anymore. And who, if not they, would be able to shine a bright light into the dark corners of industrial modernity?

CCB Magazine:You have just launched the "Bauhaus of the Earth" project to advance timber construction via circular processes. The building sector accounts for 40 percent of total CO2 emissions. The concept of sustainability was founded in 1713 by Hans Carl von Carlowitz with the demand that only as much wood should be felled as could naturally grow back. As a climate scientist, are you calling for the clearing of forests?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:No, absolutely not. In particular, we need to reforest degraded areas around the world in order to sequester CO2. Forests absorb almost a third of the CO2 emitted by humans every year. We must now abandon the mistakes of the past by stopping using steel and concrete that cannot be recycled properly. This is also where our "Bauhaus of the Earth" project comes in. We want to address the Green Deal, the transformation of the entire national economy toward sustainability, with the Bauhaus concept. The Bauhaus came into being in 1919, striving for total works of art that brought together architects, designers, craftsmen and artists. Today, we must pursue this approach anew under ecological auspices.

CCB Magazine:And what does that mean now?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:This means that we specifically use wood, bamboo, hemp, loam and other materials without a heavy CO2 backpack. Among other things, our concept envisages recycling well over 90 percent of the recyclable materials used in construction. There will soon be more than 50 scientists, building experts and creative minds working on the "Bauhaus of the Earth" project. At the heart of the project is the vision of an organic architecture whose renewable raw materials are taken from a wisely managed biosphere in dynamic equilibrium. This presupposes an attractive demand market for the existing forest developing in a positive way despite its use. The harvested biomass is stored in durable products such as cross-laminated timber or chemical-free furniture. In this way, we remove some of the CO2 emitted by the fossil fuel industry from the earth's atmosphere. The bottom line is that we can thus release significant amounts of the carbon budget we still have worldwide to limit global warming to two degrees compared to pre-industrial times.

CCB Magazine:Authors like Peter Wohlleben would disagree with you. He argues that we must not clear-cut forests but allow them to grow naturally in order to strengthen the existing forests as a carbon store. Architects like Daniel Fuhrhop even turn away from new construction altogether - they say it must be about rebuilding the existing stock. And opponents of the circular economy argue that it does not move away from overconsumption. In this issue, sustainability researcher Niko Paech calls for a drastic reduction in consumption and production. He says this is the only way a sustainable society has a chance.

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:Now that’s a whole lot of false or questionable statements! How many printed pages are you giving me to reply? Let me briefly clarify the following. Of course, new construction is needed if the additional two billion people expected on this planet by 2050 are to find a home. Moreover, billions of the earth's current citizens still live in informal or squalid settlements. To ignore this would be postcolonial arrogance. Incidentally, even prosperous Germany is full of ugly, dysfunctional post-war buildings that need to be replaced. And as for the newly fashionable romanticization of the forester, we've been managing forest ecosystems for 1,000 years or more, and it's perfectly sustainable. What the nature purists fail to realize is that a forest left to its own devices will eventually reach the climax state, at which point it will no longer sequester CO2. By contrast, the value-added extraction of biomass sets something like a permanent pump for "negative" emissions in motion. And as for the circular economy, of course even circulation enthusiasts should keep in mind that all vital cycles on earth can only be partially closed. Without the constant inflow of solar energy, however, nothing works at all. And if we make extensive use of it, we as a civilization can also turn so to speak in ever-larger circles.

CCB Magazine:Mr. Schellnhuber, in this issue we address the issue of sustainability in the various cultural sectors. It is striking that art often practices radical renunciation, while the creative industries approach sustainable solutions in an entrepreneurial way. When young climate activists went on hunger strike last year, you called for an end to it - but made it clear that you yourself could imagine a hunger strike as a last resort. Should we be worried about you?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:No, at least not yet (laughs). In any case, I'm one tough Bavarian and could probably last a long time without food. My open letter to the hunger strikers was an ethical necessity, because it really was a matter of life and death.

CCB Magazine:Final question: How radical do art and culture have to be to be able to make a difference?

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber:Art and culture have to get to the bottom of things, even where it is painfully cold and dirty. At the same time, it dismays me when young people go on hunger strike. They should be falling in love, having fun and making bold plans at that age. But when Greta Thunberg came to my office the year before last, I realized that young people today are taking on the burden of responsibility for the future because conventional politics has shied away from that responsibility for too long. And many cultural workers are now willing to share this burden as well. We now have one more decade to change course. Let us do our duty to humanity.

Do you know it? Our new magazine on sustainability and culture 

You want to have the new CCB Magazine for free? [Click here]