Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to The Guardian, tipping points leading to irreversible climate harm and an existential threat to our civilisation may have already been crossed, though there is still time to try to undo some of the damage.
Climate emergency: world ‘may have crossed tipping points’
Warning of ‘existential threat to civilisation’ as impacts lead to cascade of unstoppable events
Damian Carrington Environment editor @dpcarrington
Thu 28 Nov 2019 05.00 AEDTThe world may already have crossed a series of climate tipping points, according to a stark warning from scientists. This risk is “an existential threat to civilisation”, they say, meaning “we are in a state of planetary emergency”.
…
The planet has already heated by 1C and the temperature is certain to rise further, due to past emissions and because greenhouse gas levels are still rising. The scientists further warn that one tipping point, such as the release of methane from thawing permafrost, may fuel others, leading to a cascade.
The researchers, writing in a commentary article in the journal Nature, acknowledge that the complex science of tipping points means great uncertainty remains. But they say the potential damage from the tipping points is so big and the time to act so short, that “to err on the side of danger is not a responsible option”. They call for urgent international action.
“A saving grace is that the rate at which damage accumulates from tipping could still be under our control to some extent,” they write. “The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril. International action – not just words – must reflect this.”
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/27/climate-emergency-world-may-have-crossed-tipping-points
The quoted Nature article is like the Guardian article, except not as well written – basically a flat demand we do what we are told.
Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against
The growing threat of abrupt and irreversible climate changes must compel political and economic action on emissions.
Timothy M. Lenton, Owen Gaffney, Stefan Rahmstorf, Katherine Richardson, Will Steffen & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
…
Here we summarize evidence on the threat of exceeding tipping points, identify knowledge gaps and suggest how these should be plugged. We explore the effects of such large-scale changes, how quickly they might unfold and whether we still have any control over them.
In our view, the consideration of tipping points helps to define that we are in a climate emergency and strengthens this year’s chorus of calls for urgent climate action — from schoolchildren to scientists, cities and countries.
…
Act now
In our view, the evidence from tipping points alone suggests that we are in a state of planetary emergency: both the risk and urgency of the situation are acute (see ‘Emergency: do the maths’).
EMERGENCY: DO THE MATHS
We define emergency (E) as the product of risk and urgency. Risk (R) is defined by insurers as probability (p) multiplied by damage (D). Urgency (U) is defined in emergency situations as reaction time to an alert (τ) divided by the intervention time left to avoid a bad outcome (T). Thus:
E = R × U = p × D × τ / T
The situation is an emergency if both risk and urgency are high. If reaction time is longer than the intervention time left (τ / T > 1), we have lost control.
We argue that the intervention time left to prevent tipping could already have shrunk towards zero, whereas the reaction time to achieve net zero emissions is 30 years at best. Hence we might already have lost control of whether tipping happens. A saving grace is that the rate at which damage accumulates from tipping — and hence the risk posed — could still be under our control to some extent.
The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril. International action — not just words — must reflect this.
Read more: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03595-0
Their unphysical climate models contain hidden errors at least an order of magnitude greater than the alleged CO2 signal, they can’t actually tell you how much influence CO2 has on global temperature, none of the disasters they claim are imminent have actually happened, yet they claim they can put meaningful values into the terms of their insurance risk equation.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yet another load of computer model B.S.
Now, now, now, it’s obvious they Know what they’re proselytizing about. The Earth was much warmer in the early Holocene and had “Tipped” into the inferno state we languish in today. This nasty post tipping point apocalyptic heat has melted the brains of all our scholars turning them into the mush required to make such hare brained proclamations
I do seriously wonder why they never explain why all these disasters didn’t happen the last time the temperatures were this high and the CO2 concentration was higher.
Why did this “inferno state we languish in” not actually happen? Why is it going to happen this time?
New minster,
I ask this question of climistas all the time and their reply “This I different because it’s human made”!!!!!!!
Because this time it’s happening faster. That makes it different.
….or so I heard some millennials at work saying, so it must be true.
The left is suffering from profound mental illness, especially in the millennial population. Our public education structure has poisoned an entire generation with leftist garbage. It’s possible the kids with some life experience will out-grow it but I am not optimistic.
Oh no !! A tipping point of tipping points all tipping and pointing together: it’s worse than we thought !!
I used to be a skeptic but I have to admit, I’m starting to get a little worried. I mean a tipping point of tipping points is a pretty sobering thought.
“Sam Pyeatte November 28, 2019 at 9:19 am
The left is suffering from profound mental illness, especially in the millennial population. Our public education structure has poisoned an entire generation with leftist garbage. It’s possible the kids with some life experience will out-grow it but I am not optimistic.”
https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-huawei&sxsrf=ACYBGNSl8IcyMFbQ4zhm6W5mCsOWRtTLyg%3A1575394777555&ei=2Z3mXY6wIc_TwALul4XwBA&q=Millennial+reading+abilities+extremely+low&oq=Millennial+reading+abilities+extremely+low&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.
E = R × U = p × D × τ / T
Wow! Sciency sounding, and worthless.
Zero urgency.
Absolutely. They don’t know anything about the insurance business, either. Risk is based on hard, real-world statistics, not on guesstimates pulled out of a hat.
That’s largely correct, although I helped to price the insurance coverage in advance of Y2K, and pretty much by definition we had to do some guesstimates. I’ve also priced nuclear terrorism, which thankfully has no directly relevant hard statistics, so we had to do some estimating. That said, insurance coverage for property reflecting potential losses from tornadoes, floods and hurricanes is very much based on hard real-world statistics.
Sara
The insurance industry sees risks at two levels
1 – the actual insurance payout risk due to what they are covering for. They have very smart people and systems working on the constantly.
2 – The sell value (premium) to the sucker misled customer of potential and increasing risk from things such as “Climate Change”. Sea level rise, flood inundation, whatever
The New Zealand Insurance Council rates risk based on the RCP 8.5. What they are saying that based on forecasts, is that sea level rise will be up to 300mm over the next 15 years. Over 4 times the current rate.
This allows them to start increasing their premiums to help pay for it when it happens.
So I asked the CEO at a recent public meeting – where is the water coming from to increase the SLR. The normal warmist reply resulted.
The interesting part was the people at the meeting saw me as misinformed, antisocial and jeered, and the guy who was about to blood suck their premiums as the good guy.
Watch the insurance industry profits soar as the years pass. Have you checked you insurance bill for climate change adjustments ??
Regards
“Zero urgency”? Are you kidding? All true believers should commit hara-kiri now to avoid the cli-pocalypse! It will be so painful to wait until then!
1) ‘cli-pocalypse’ stolen from another commenter on a different post.
2) CTM – I’ll understand if you don’t let this post.
Yup.
Risk is not defined like that. Risk is risk. What is the chance of ‘Something’ happening?
You then have Consequence. Death? Serious injury? Hurt Feelings?
Both need to be taken in consideration. A low risk of fatal injury is a greater concern than a absolute chance of hurt feelings, which is why in the real world professionals deal with engineering safety and not trigger warnings.
Dry your eyes, Snowflake and let the adults work out what will happen if protective guards are not designed, installed and maintained correctly.
John is absolutely right, that equation is bollocks.
What if the risk is longer growing seasons, larger areas of crop land, faster plant growth (because of the CO2).
If the risk is negative, does the science equation still mean something?
The fact that the Warmies have NEVER (to my knowledge) even hinted at the possibility that warming could bring benefits – we ONLY hear of coming disasters – shows me that this is fake science.
Craig
I sincerely hope it’s not all bollocks. I hope all their tipping points have been breached, and I hope this is the standard by which all other global warming science is measured against from here on in.
Because, of course, the climate hasn’t changed, it’s the same as it was thousands of years ago. Event’s like rain, snow, wind etc. might fluctuate, wax and wane etc. but they are still all there.
The only thing that might have changed, in tiny, inconsequential increments, is the earths average temperature, and even that’s doubtful over the last 20 years or so.
So when all alarmist science is based on this tipping point ‘revelation’, they are going to end up looking really stupid when, in 10 years time nothing has happened, yet again!
The more the public are exposed to this nonsense the more fed up they get.
BBC announcements on various UN and ‘scientific scare stories are virtually every week now, and each more dramatic than the last, but they now seem to tumble down the league table of the BBC website much more quickly these days.
I guess technology in the form of ‘click counting’ to determine the value of a particular story is serving sceptics purposes very well as people now just don’t bother reading the weekly climate comics.
And the only recourse the media and alarmist scientist have is to make everything more dramatic each time, which simply compounds the climate fatigue the public is displaying.
Roll on 2030, I say!
I’ve taken to switching the radio off as soon as they say “climate emergency (/crisis)”. Yesterday I switched it on then off again 3 times – total listening time less than 1 minute.
Insurance risk of a “Bomb Cyclone” = € 3.7 Trillion
Insurance risk of a strong rain squall = € 0.00
Therefore … the language is costly. Very, very, costly
I have more confidence in the Drake Equation.
So, E (Emergency) is a value somewhere between -Infinity and +Infinity.
What is this Emergency measured in? If you cancel out the t/T, and p has no units (it’s just a probability), you are left with $.
If the time where T=0 has already passed, would that make T negative? Suddenly your “Emergency” goes from $+Huge Number to $-Huge Number (problem solved, right?).
There are some things in this equation that need to be defined a bit:
– p: Probability of what exactly?
– t: The reaction time. Speculated as 30 years to achieve net zero CO2 emissions. But that presumes that CO2 emissions are causal, which they aren’t.
– T: Time to do what? Get earth back to the Little Ice Age, I’ll pass thanks.
There are NO tipping points, because the global climate is largely self regulating. If temperature increases, evaporation will increase resulting in increased cloud cover, higher albedo and a lowering of the temperature. It is quite an effective thermostat for the planet. If there were tipping points, we would not be experiencing the relatively mild climate we are, we would either be an ice cube or a boiling soup.
Mark H – November 27, 2019 at 7:54 pm
“ So, E (Emergency) is a value somewhere between -Infinity and +Infinity. ”
Actually, …… E (Emergency) is a value that is a little less than …… “the little end of nothing”.
They could make it even look more “sciency” by adding exponents to the variables on the right side of the equation, but noting that the exponents might not be much different than 1.0.
E = R × U = p^e1 × D^e2 × τ^e3 / T^e4
Where’s my grant?
it all hinges on the value of ‘p’, probability and since this is all based on ‘models’ that are actually more like catastrophic automatons performing a semi-pre programmed dance of the sugar plumb fairies, what it really amounts to is WOLF! WOLF! WOLF! WOOF! WOOF! woof, woof, woof…… woof, woof……woof……
( can some one check the bank balance and see if the funding has turned up?)
Komrade Kuma
We all know you’re rolling in Big Oil Cash………:)
Err……about that Ferrari we discussed………….!
The Ferrari you offer is RED ! I want a GREEN one!
Don’t you know anything about how this all works??
Oooh the greek letter tau. Stand back, philistines, this one is for the (fanfare please) scientists. You wouldn’t understand. Heck even if you tried to understand the sheer scienceyness of thus equation, you wouldn’t even be wrong.
Yes. Risk and Urgency are not mutually exclusive events. Neither are reaction time and time remaining to act. The formulas are OBVIOUSLY meaningless.
I define stupid (S) as the product of ignorance and arrogance. Ignorance (I) is defined by zealots as propagandists (p) multiplied by hype (H). Alarmism (A) is defined in NON-emergency situations as OVER-reaction time to a delusion (delta) divided by intervention time left to avoid being proven wrong (T). Thus:
S = I x A = p x H x delta/T
The situation is stupid if both ignorance and arrogance are high. If accumulated OVER-reaction time is longer than accumulated intervention time to avoid being proven wrong, then we have lost our minds.
“the complex science of tipping points…”
They really are making it up as they go. I guess when all you’ve got is garbage science to back up your garbage claims, you’re going throw everything and anything at the wall, and see what sticks.
Bruce Cobb
November 27, 2019 at 6:11 pm
You don’t really think they’re making “up the complex science of tipping points” do you. I’m sure Saint Greta has a PhD in Tipping Points. Now she can really say the “science is settled” with some authority.
So all the environmentalists, UN officials, climate crusading celebrities, and journalists can:
A) stop flying,
B) turn down your thermostat to 15C and wear a sweater
C) turn off your air conditioning
D) give up all auto transport – buy a bike or walk.
E) move into a small apartment to lesson your footprint.
But we all know you hypocrites will instead act like Justin Trudeau and virtue signal your way around the planet.
Check out the bogus equation. Pure 100% male bovine excrement.
..and not one word about who “we” is that’s causing CO2 levels to rise….
They’ve twirled the ooga-booga climate kn0b up to 11.
They forgot to define climate.
re. tipping points
Medieval Warm period (warmer than now)
Roman Warm period (even warmer)
Holocene Optimum (warmer yet)
Been there, done that. There were no tipping points. Things were better. Humanity prospered.
Don’t stop there…if I’m not mistaken, Earth didn’t suddenly turn into Venus during the Eemian or earlier.
Is a tipping point where you pour another beer grab some popcorn?
Speaking of tipping point
Nothing like fake tipping points. Their bucket is empty, nothing to tip over.
The tipping point is real! Just ask US Congressman Hank Johnson, who single-handedly was able to stop Guam from capsizing – tipping over – by refusing to let the military put too many people on one side of the tiny, vulnerable island. Good job Hank! You have been an inspiration and role model for Greenies and climate scientists alike, with your keen insights and understanding of what’s at stake. They are following in your footsteps.
“world ‘may have crossed tipping points’”
Whew! At least they admitted that the Earth has only warmed by 1 degree. Had me worried there.
What’s all the fuss about, again?
..and NASA says on 0.8C….not one whole degree
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
The NASA page states:
“… This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit …”.
Not quite, the HADCRUT4 global mean has it about +0.6C relative to the 1951-1980 average:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/mean:12/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1880/mean:12/offset:0.04
Even “worse”: I you plot unadjusted HADCRUT3 global mean it’s some 0.4 degrees Celsius
You know, there are only 1881 reporting stations out of 27, 383, in the NOAA GHCN-Monthly v4 data set that have an unbroken 360-month series between Jan-1951 and Dec-1980. Makes me wonder how much infilling and interpolation is involved in getting those colorful charts and global average anomalies down to three decimal points.
Ah, I see a new Climate pAction doll to add to the Climate Patch Kids collection to teach the doctrine of Tipping Point with Real Climate Solutions. Haven’t come up with a name yet, but it would come with a toy couch and a bottle of Klimate KoolAid. Feed it bottle after bottle until it gets tippy, falls on the couch and goes to sleep. Then place its hand in a bowl of warm water on the floor and voila – Real Climate Solutions!
Will Steffen and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber” Oh Noes.
yeah saw those 2 names and groaned
steffens an abc pet gets aired often to bemaon and whinge and bullshit
Will someone please tell these morons that I DO NOT want to go back to the cold of the Little Ice Age! I very much appreciate the generally improving climate (with the exception of the 1930’s) we’ve had since 1850. Planetary history demonstrates that warm equals improvement in the human condition.
” … basically a flat demand we do what we are told.”
So this is nothing more than an appeal to authority. A classic logical fallacy; why am I not surprised?
Well, we have no evidence for a similar tipping point in all of Earth history, and CO2 accumulations in the atsmosphere have been a lot higher in the past, yet those periods of time do not show any climate catastrophe.
This is just more scaremongering leading up to the climate conference in Madrid. Alarmists have left all restraints behind. They are making dire claims that can’t possibly be true, yet they are making them. Like this one here about tipping points. Their lies are criminal in the harm they do to the unsuspecting public who don’t realize they are being lied to and are frightened to death by these claims of catastrophe.
They’ve even upped the anti by claiming it may already be too late but we may be able to mitigate it somewhat but only if we act NOW! This is called “trying to stampede the uninformed into actions they might not otherwise take”.
And I note we are dealing with the same bunch of alarmists who put this kind of BS (Bad Science) out all the time.
Yes, its a re-run of the tired old tipping point argument again, where a system is supposed to move rapidly out of equilibrium to one end state. As far as I can see, there is no geological/proxy evidence for this type of event having occurred anywhere during the last 14,000 years, back to the end of the last ice age. All of the natural climate changes were rather gradual. And there is no evidence now of rapid change beyond historical norms (especially if you remove the manual temperature adjustments). If anything, progressively lower sunspot minima are pointing in a colder direction.
But you all miss the point! This is MAN MADE carbon dioxide which will produce worse effects than the Natural product the planet has been used to. /sarc
Susan
Didn’t you know that man made CO2 has an entirely different composition to natural CO2, which has been resident on the planet since time immemorial, often in much greater quantities in the atmosphere?
See, easy when you know how!
Man made CO2 is carbon, not to be mistaken for actual carbon, however, that would be carbon, which we know as man made CO2.
Susan
I really should really read all posts before concocting my own. 🙂
“All of the natural climate changes were rather gradual.”
Not quite. The Younger Dryas period went suddenly cold, then a thousand years later, went suddenly warm again, and we don’t know why.
With that exeption, you’re generally right.
Amazing how fast the narrative has gone from saving the future to reversing the past.
From time to time here at WUWT I have quoted from NASA’s article on its Earth Observatory website “Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget.” It is dated January 14, 2009. These quotes have supported the heat-engine nature of the atmosphere’s operation, and the concept that the greenhouse effect diminishes with altitude.
In this case, as an institution, NASA knew that the concept of a tipping point initiating a runaway condition is not supported by the fundamentals of emitted radiation. This is from that article:
“Temperature doesn’t infinitely rise, however, because atoms and molecules on Earth are not just absorbing sunlight, they are also radiating thermal infrared energy (heat). The amount of heat a surface radiates is proportional to the fourth power of its temperature. If temperature doubles, radiated energy increases by a factor of 16 (2 to the 4th power). If the temperature of the Earth rises, the planet rapidly emits an increasing amount of heat to space. This large increase in heat loss in response to a relatively smaller increase in temperature—referred to as radiative cooling—is the primary mechanism that prevents runaway heating on Earth.”
The article is still found by searching on the title. Maybe we need a new hashtag #NASAKnew to counter the tipping point narrative.
When the palm trees start growing in Reykjavik I’ll say we might be approaching too warm. Based on the ocean ice around Iceland right now, I would say it won’t be occurring this year, so we got that going for us.
There’s a very good article in this week’s Spectator magazine by David Gunnlaugsson, a former PM of Iceland, called ‘Cold Hard Truth’- basically saying they have seen it all before and it’s nothing to panic about. What say we listen to people who know what they’re talking about because they live and work there for a change, instead of hysterical snowflakes from London or California, etc.?
Andy Mansell
Hey!
What happened to the alarmist hunger strikes?
They knew what they were talking about, didn’t they?
They are on day 9 and most still going, it just isn’t getting any coverage except by the guardian. We haven’t heard from Loydo and Griff for a while so I am hopeful they ahve joined. We can but hope they aren’t quiters but being so slow it isn’t going to get MSM attention so perhaps they need to find a faster way.
haha… hunger strike. OK, Doomers
They should go on a marijuana strike. Anyway, order a pizza for delivery to the strikers and see what happens.
They grow bananas in Iceland. https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/bananas-in-iceland
The only tipping point that has been reached is this: Climate Change has reached “Too Big To Fail” status.
“Climate Change has reached “Too Big To Fail” status.”
It seems that way. The only problem for the alarmists is the temperatures are not cooperating with their theory. I guess that’s why they are moving up the timetable hoping they can get political action going before it becomes obvious that the Earth is not getting “hotter and hotter”, even while CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing.
Past the tipping point? Party hardy. It’s all over. Cancel the research and the worldwide meetings. It’s over, at long last.
They sound like a typical delusional patient at a mental hospital that repeats the same gibberish over and over again.
I love tipping points.. I like the whooshing sound as they fly by…
Thank you, Douglas Adams.
Johan Rockström? He’s basically an ‘educated’ farmer, often laughed at in Sweden …