3 ms·
The more we do, and the sooner, the better the outcome. There are no real cutoffs. It doesn't make sense to stop trying if we don't read some magic level by so
by Gravityloss 5y ago
The more we do, and the sooner, the better the outcome. There are no real cutoffs.
It doesn't make sense to stop trying if we don't read some magic level by some arbitrary date.
To make it really concrete, 3 meters of sea level rise is really bad, but 7 meters is much worse.
- algebraically 5y agoThe current trajectory has locked us into 2C+ of warming. Even if some magical technology appears out of nowhere and allows us to start capturing and sequestering carbon at the gigaton volumes required to make a dent we're still locked into 2C+ of warming. [1][2] At this point it is no longer a matter of doing enough, it's a matter of actively adapting to the reality of a warmer planet because no matter what we do 2C+ warming is an immutable fact. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s254IPHXgVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s254IPHXgVA 2: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-a-warming-planet/three-scenarios-for-the-future-of-climate-change https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-a-warming-planet/th...
- Gravityloss 5y agoOf course we must adapt too. But 4C is a lot worse outcome than 2.5 C.
- algebraically 5y agoMy point is that people still think there is a way to salvage things when there isn't and because they think there is a technological solution they are refusing to change their consumption habits. That's what I mean by adaptation. By the way, at 4C there is no longer any human civilization as we now know it. Even at 3C we're basically screwed.