3 ms·

Doesn't it say emissions would have to be 3x greater tham today and maybe it's a possibility after that point?

• Kuinox 3y ago
  No, concentration. It need 3x the current CO2 in the air to reach it.
  • simmerup 3y ago
    Which considering that 50% of total CO2 emissions from fossil fuels were emitted in the last 28 years, that doesn't seem to far away
    • shkkmo 3y ago
      And in those 28 years, CO2 levels have risen < 100ppm. That is less than 1/9th of the rise needed to reach the 1200ppm levels that this model predicts is necessary to disrupt cloud formation. As the paper itself clarifies, the worst case model for CO2 emissions still wouldn't have us hit those levels for 75 years. > If fossil fuel use continues to rapidly expand over the remainder of the century, it is possible levels could get that high. The Representative Concentration Pathways 8.5 scenario (RCP8.5), a very high emissions scenario examined by climate scientists, has the Earth’s atmosphere reaching around 1,100ppm by the year 2100. But this would require the world to massively expand coal use and eschew any climate mitigation over the rest of this century. So yes, it is a scary theoretical possibility. One that helps show why even minor mitigations of CO2 emissions growth are better than nothing. However, it is a risk that is not imminent and is something that even our current anemic response to global warming will probably avoid.
      • simmerup 3y ago
        > the worst case model for CO2 emissions still wouldn't have us hit those levels for 75 years. Honestly that’s really not reassuring. I would have hoped it take far longer than that