PARIS, Oct 16, 2024 (BSS/AFP) - Some approaches to tackling global warming 
can have unintended knock-on consequences for nature and the protection of 
biodiversity, say scientists urging a more coordinated effort on these 
challenges.

"Sometimes by trying to find a solution to a problem, we risk creating damage 
elsewhere," Anne Larigauderie at the Intergovernmental Scientific and 
Political Platform on Biodiversity (IPBES), an expert independent body, told 
AFP.

The IPBES will publish a report in December on how different crises -- 
including climate change and biodiversity loss -- are closely related and 
should be addressed together, not in isolation.

The IPBES and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 
warned in 2021 that a siloed approach risked "actions which, inadvertently, 
prevent the resolution of one or the other problem, or even both."

In Britain, for example, an ostensibly sound policy of planting trees on 
wetlands backfired when in turn these carbon-rich landscapes dried up, 
releasing the planet-heating emissions stored in their roots and soil.

- Negative effects -

Climate Action Network, a collective of non-government organisations, has 
warned against "false solutions" which promise a healthier planet but with a 
cost to people or ecosystems attached.

Intentionally injecting iron into the oceans, for example, to boost 
microplankton growth may seem promising but "geoengineering" techniques have 
raised concerns about potential repercussions.

Alison Smith, a researcher at the University of Oxford, said iron 
fertilisation was "likely to cause massive environmental damage for uncertain 
climate gain."

"Measures taken to mitigate climate change must be evaluated according to 
their overall benefits and risks and not only according to their carbon 
footprint," said the Foundation for Biodiversity Research in 2022.

Wind turbines produce clean power and reduce the dependence of energy systems 
on fossil fuels, but can pose a risk to migratory birds or bats in some 
locations.

And building dams for hydroelectricity can block the passage of fish along 
waterways, reducing their populations.

- 'Breaking down silos' -

"With crises as vast, complex and interconnected as climate change and 
biodiversity loss, focusing on one aspect of the problem will never be 
enough," said Tom Oliver at the University of Reading.

It is "important to look beyond 'sticking plaster fixes'" such as 
geoengineering, he said, which "can have huge anticipated side effects."

Installing "underwater curtains" to protect glaciers in Antarctica from 
warming waters -- an idea floated at last year's UN climate summit -- could 
impede nutrient flow, Lars Smedsrud, from the University of Bergen, wrote in 
the journal Nature this year.

In the quest for solutions to our biggest and most daunting challenges it is 
"important to look at the big picture -- not just focus narrowly on climate 
change," said Smith.

She is one of many experts pushing for nature-based solutions that have 
"combined benefits for biodiversity, the climate and populations".

A 2020 study in the journal Global Change Biology concluded that "nature-
based interventions were most often shown to be as effective or more so than 
alternative interventions for addressing climate impacts."

And it is in preserving existing ecosystems, rather than trying to recreate 
new ones, that the potential is greatest.

A 2023 study in Nature found that simply protecting existing forests and 
leaving them alone to regenerate would deliver considerable carbon removal 
benefits.

"There is no one single silver bullet -- we need to do everything we can, 
across all sectors, countries and methods," said Smith.

"Breaking down silos is the only way forward that won't cause more problems 
than it solves."