A major study published on Wednesday warns that even temporarily exceeding the 1.5°C global warming limit could lead to irreversible consequences, including rising sea levels and mass biodiversity loss.…
Yeah, definitely a “no shit?” moment – and we’ll be very lucky if we stay under 2°C, let alone 1.5°C, even if we suddenly went carbon negative right at this very second.
Well, nothing useful at least – I’m sure that with the current meteoric rise of the extreme right many things will happen, but they’ll be more of the “death camp” variety than the “fixing the climate” variety
edit: I think high-emission scenarios (ie scenarios that assume we’re going to do jack fucking shit and emissions will keep rising, which frankly seems probable) have predicted average temperature rises of 4 – 5°C. I’m trying to dig up some sources, hang on
Revenge of the Edit:
the following refer to the global mean screen temperature[1] at the end of the century for the most pessimistic SSPs[2]
CanESM5’s prediction is around 20 – 21°C, giving an anomaly of ~5 – 6°C
CNRM-CM6-1 gives global mean screen temps of around 18 – 19°C, so an anomaly of ~3 – 4°C
I thinkUKESM1-0-LL had an anomaly of around 3.5 – 5°C but I’m too tired to read that paper and can’t seem to find the relevant figures
ditto for GFDL-CM4
The Edit Strikes Back:
The IPCC’s 6th Assessment Report (AR6) includes data from older and usually less sensitive versions (ie. very often more optimistic…) of the models above plus a ton of others, and its Physical Science Basis report’s policymaker summary had this handy table:
Note that climate models are just that, models. We know they still have a lot of biases and they’re not perfect, but they do already predict historical climate really well, and it should be telling that the better the models get, the worse the predictions tend to be
Yeah, definitely a “no shit?” moment – and we’ll be very lucky if we stay under 2°C, let alone 1.5°C, even if we suddenly went carbon negative right at this very second.
But we must go higher so that the profits trickle down to us. /s
Are there models for 3c or 4c? From what I see, the world ain’t gonna do shit until entire countries become tangibly uninhabitable.
I doubt anything will happen even then.
Well, nothing useful at least – I’m sure that with the current meteoric rise of the extreme right many things will happen, but they’ll be more of the “death camp” variety than the “fixing the climate” variety
edit: I think high-emission scenarios (ie scenarios that assume we’re going to do jack fucking shit and emissions will keep rising, which frankly seems probable) have predicted average temperature rises of 4 – 5°C. I’m trying to dig up some sources, hang on
Revenge of the Edit:
the following refer to the global mean screen temperature[1] at the end of the century for the most pessimistic SSPs[2]
The Edit Strikes Back:
The IPCC’s 6th Assessment Report (AR6) includes data from older and usually less sensitive versions (ie. very often more optimistic…) of the models above plus a ton of others, and its Physical Science Basis report’s policymaker summary had this handy table:
Note that climate models are just that, models. We know they still have a lot of biases and they’re not perfect, but they do already predict historical climate really well, and it should be telling that the better the models get, the worse the predictions tend to be
temperature measured at a standardized height using a “Stevenson screen”. Current global mean screen temperature is around 15°C ↩︎
“Shared Socioeconomic Pathways”, standardized modeling scenarios ↩︎