5 ms·
If this is 1°C, what's 2° going to be like? 3.5°? I fear the only possible way through this by deploying solar geoengineering-- soon-- in order to buy us enou
by alexose 5y ago
If this is 1°C, what's 2° going to be like? 3.5°?
I fear the only possible way through this by deploying solar geoengineering-- soon-- in order to buy us enough time to scale up carbon capture. In addition to transitioning our energy infrastructure and transportation. It can be done.
Letting these conditions continue will almost certainly result in destabilization that make an organized response even less tenable.
- magicalhippo 5y agoThis is why 1.5C is such a bad slogan. Here in the media we've heard politicians and environmentalists etc talk about the 1.5C goal all the time. But it's not like getting a pay rise, with each day getting just a tad warmer. The average tells you nothing about the extremes.
- alexose 5y agoYeah. I grew up in Seattle. The thought that it was 108F there this summer is just horrifying.
- cryptoz 5y ago94 in the forecast for Seattle this week ~Friday, again. Forecast was 90 earlier, now 94, been rising for the past few days. (99 forecast in Tacoma)
- jacquesm 5y agoThat's harsh but not as bad as some places right now. Ironically, the only thing it will lead to is people turning up the AC closing the feedback loop.
- jacquesm 5y agoExactly. It's 1.5 degrees Celsius to heat 5x10^15 tonnes of atmosphere. That's a mind-boggling amount of energy and it has to go somewhere, all that power is available to disrupt our 'normal' weather systems. The laypersons interpretation of 1.5 degrees change is 'so what, it will be a little bit warmer'. The difference between those two views is very hard to reconcile, simply because of the scale.
- pjc50 5y agoSolar geoengineering is unproven technology; is there even any estimate on how much it will cost and how long it may take? Lots of things can be done. Most of them won't. People prefer denial - not everyone, but enough to sabotage progress. The pandemic has made this abundantly clear.
- alexose 5y agoIt's generally agreed to be highly cost effective. Via Wikipedia: > The annual cost of delivering 5 million tons of an albedo enhancing aerosol (sufficient to offset the expected warming over the next century) to an altitude of 20 to 30 km is estimated at US$2 billion to 8 billion. In comparison, the annual cost estimates for climate damage or emission mitigation range from US$200 billion to 2 trillion.
- pjc50 5y ago> delivering 5 million tons of an albedo enhancing aerosol (sufficient to offset the expected warming over the next century) to an altitude of 20 to 30 km ... How much CO2 is that going to emit? Is that achieved by aircraft or rockets?
- mc32 5y agoRail cannons?
- pjc50 5y agoAnother experimental technology! How many MJ/tonne does that take? How many sites do you need? How many more nuclear plants does it take running continuously to manufacture and launch all this? Who pays for this? How do you persuade them? How do you protect it from getting cut by the denialism faction as soon as they get elected?
- hnthrowaway9721 5y agoWhat exactly is your point? Things are difficult, let’s not bother doing anything at all? Just let the world burn?
- jacquesm 5y ago> If this is 1°C, what's 2° going to be like? 3.5°? Lots of dead people.