A major shortcoming of the National Low-Carbon Strategy, in French: Stratégie Nationale Bas Carbone and Plan Climat, was to underestimate the consequences of global warming, assuming that the objectives of the Paris Agreement would be reached. Adaptation plans should be built instead to adapt to the current trajectory from the NDCs, which cannot keep global warming under +2.6°C. For France, these are the First NDC of the European Union and the First France NDC. A realistic estimate is that the current GreenHouse Gaz (GHG) emission trajectory corresponds to +3°global warming, given that many countries are not on target with their current NDC, let alone reinforced NDCs. Fortunately for France, information published on the ONERC (Observatoire National sur les Effets du Réchauffement Climatique) web site shows it is now gearing up to face this issue in a realistic way, probably taking less optimistic hypotheses on the consequences of global warming in the next revision of PNACC (Plan National d’Adaptation au Changement Climatique): the Climate Change National Adaptation Plan, named PNACC-2.

The first objective of PNACC-2 will thus be a better coordination between mitigation and adaptation: “Improve consistency between mitigation and adaptation policies”, mentions the last ONERC report published in November 2017: towards a 2nd climate change adaptation plan for France.

Estimates of CO2 emissions required to beat current NDC emissions trajectory. Source: independent research from Saving Our Planet/Climate Action Now! and The Shift Project, December 2016.

It is necessary to adequately describe and quote the cost of adaptation plans to +3°C or more to make people understand that we need to stick to the +1.5°C objective, with a reasonable chance of getting there so we can make sure to stay well below the +2°C maximum threshold. If such adaptation plans were made, they would be consistent with the Stern Review, which quotes 5 to 20% GDP cost for any adaptation plan to the current trajectory of CO2 emissions, or even more if pessimistic hypotheses are confirmed, as seems to be the case from recent field observations. Each country would then clearly evaluate their own interest to invest for the climate massively, for instance in climate-friendly and resilient buildings, coal power plant replacements, energy savings, cleaner transportation, CO2 capture by tree planting and CO2-made materials than trying to adapt.

Thus, Climate Scorecard encourages France to address this issue by asking President Emmanuel Macron, its Government and Parliament, to set up a joint task force to evaluate the appropriate adaptation measures to +3°C and multi-meter sea level rise by 2100. Then, this would be considered as a realistic worst-case scenario against which any plan combining mitigation and adaptation would be evaluated, so as to enable fact and science-based decision making.

Climate Scorecard would be able to help setting up and to contribute to such a task force.