While many were still engulfed in their duvets recovering from the night before, the UN spent Sunday morning  launching a big report on strategies to tackle climate change. The report was the third instalment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) major review of the most up-to-date climate change research.

If you’ve been too busy to catch up on the swathes of media coverage since then, have no fear – we’ve speed-read it all for you:

International cooperation

A significant proportion of the media focused on the report’s message that there is still time for countries to act to avoid the worst impacts of climate change – but only if they work together.

• The Financial Times said the IPCC was sure there is “still time to save the world”. It quotes one of the report’s co-chairs, Ottmar Edenhofer, saying the report carried “a message of hope”  that tackling climate change “can be done”.
• Doing so would mean cutting emissions “by up to 70% by 2050 if it is to prevent global temperatures rising by more than two degrees”, the Sunday Times reports. The IPCC’s research shows “stabilising climate is humanity’s biggest challenge”, it adds.
• Newswire Agence France Presse described the report’s findings as a “wake up call” for governments. It said the IPCC identifies a 15-year window in which countries’ will be able to act to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
• That means “governments must do more” to address rising emissions, the Washington Post argues. Countries must work together to lower emissions by 40 to 70 percent, according to the IPCC’s findings, it said.
• Taking a slightly different angle, the Independent on Sunday was the only major UK newspaper to focus on the consequences of inaction. Unless the world acts soon, the IPCC says emissions could reach a level “that could reap devastating effects on the planet”, the newspaper reports.

Low carbon energy

Much of the coverage zoomed in on what those assertions meant for the of the world’s energy mix: from wind, solar, and hydropower, to nuclear and shale gas:

• The BBC led with one of the IPCC’s top line findings: That low carbon energy generation could need to treble if the world is going to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. That means rolling out renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power while cutting coal use, the BBC says.
• The Guardian took a similar angle, saying the IPCC’s findings mean there must be an end to “centuries of coal, oil and gas supremacy”. The report should be seen as a “roadmap” for transforming the world’s currently carbon intensive economies, environment editor Damian Carrington argued. The message is clear, he says: “countries and companies relying on fossil fuels may suffer big financial losses” as governments implement the necessary climate policies.
• Telegraph columnist Geoffrey Lean concurred. The IPCC’s report could leave fossil fuels “dead in the ground”, he says. Market analysts are starting to wonder if coal-based economies are little more than a “CO2 bubble”, he muses.
• The report’s findings could be a blow to the UK government’s current energy policy, the Observer argued. The IPCC’s report spells out the need for more wind power – a move Conservatives are increasingly keen to discourage, it points out.

Some journalists interpreted the IPCC’s energy policy findings rather differently, however.

• The IPCC’s report says “fracking will cut greenhouse gas emissions and should be made central to the country’s energy production”, the Daily Mail declared. The article focuses on sections of the report that explore how gas can be used as a transition fuel as the world weans itself off more-polluting coal.
• The Sunday Times was equally excited by this prospect, but pointed out that the IPCC “said it was up to each country to decide on the mix of energy sources it needed to meet its share of the global emissions target”. While that could mean shale gas playing a role in the UK’s future energy mix, it would only reduce emissions if such development took place alongside rolling out more renewable energy generation, the Sunday Times said.
• The Telegraph argued that shale gas may not be the only non-renewable beneficiary from more stringent climate policy. In an article printed under the headline “Turn to nuclear power to avert global warming crisis, says UN”, it claims the IPCC says “established” nuclear power could play a significant role in reducing energy sector emissions.

Plan B

Not all the coverage was optimistic that countries would act to cut emissions in time, though. A number of articles took a deeper look at technologies designed to allow countries to keep emitting in the coming years:

• The Telegraph pushed the boat out furthest in this regard. It looked at a range of geoengineering options: from moon dust barriers to a giant parasol, and shiny clouds to a fake volcano. The IPCC claims any or all such options could help countries reduce emissions “in the event that countries cannot reduce their carbon emissions in time”, the Telegraph said.
• Associated Press highlighted the concerns some countries expressed with pursuing such strategies, however. Scientists are still unsure how viable the technologies are – and outline their concerns in the IPCC’s report – it points out.
• Likewise, Reuters says relying on such geoengineering techniques would be a “risky option”. It quotes the IPCC’s chairman saying most geoengineering strategies were currently “not a policy option”.

Want to know more?

• We’ve condensed the report’s 2,000 pages into 1,300 easy-to-engage-with words in our summary for everyone.
• Want a bit more detail? Here’s the report’s main messages.
• For those who prefer pictures, here’s the report in three charts.
• And if you really want to delve into the source material, here’s our guide to reading the IPCC’s reports.