So we can stop worrying and enjoy life now, right?
World is not going to avoid 1.5 Celsius global warming ‘tipping point’, researchers warn
Rob Waugh
Tue, 28 June 2022, 1:12 amThe battle to limit global warming to 1.5 Celsius by 2050 is doomed, according to researchers who have reviewed data around global warming.
To achieve the goal of limiting temperature rise by this amount, global carbon emissions must reach net zero – where emissions are balanced by carbon absorbed by plants and carbon-capture technology – by 2050.
To meet the goal, emissions will have to fall 43% by 2030, two scientists said in a paper published in Science – but emissions are still rising.
A rise of 1.5 Celsius is considered important, because above that level and there will be more heatwaves, extreme weather events, droughts and greater economic losses.
Previous research had suggested that these emissions had already led to an increase of 1.25 Celsius.
Read more: https://au.news.yahoo.com/world-is-not-going-to-avoid-15-c-global-warming-tipping-point-researchers-warn-151259096.html
The abstract of the study;
Current global efforts are insufficient to limit warming to 1.5°C
H. DAMON MATTHEWS AND SETH WYNES
SCIENCE
23 Jun 2022
Vol 376, Issue 6600
pp. 1404-1409Abstract
Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C, and the current emissions trajectory suggests that we will exceed 1.5°C in less than 10 years. Though the growth rate of global carbon dioxide emissions has slowed and many countries have strengthened their emissions targets, current midcentury net zero goals are insufficient to limit global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial temperatures. The primary barriers to the achievement of a 1.5°C-compatible pathway are not geophysical but rather reflect inertia in our political and technological systems. Both political and corporate leadership are needed to overcome this inertia, supported by increased societal recognition of the need for system-level and individual lifestyle changes. The available evidence does not yet indicate that the world has seriously committed to achieving the 1.5°C goal.
Read more (paywalled): https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abo3378
I always find it amusing when doomsday predictions are paywalled, but I guess scientists have got to eat while they’re waiting for the end of the world.
The study claims 1.25C warming has already occurred, but look around you. Nothing bad has happened.
So now we’re expected to believe that extra 0.25 warming to reach 1.5C is going to make all the difference?
Given we have plentiful paleo evidence that periods much warmer than today were full of abundance and life, like the Eocene Thermal Maximum, during which our primate ancestors encountered such favourable conditions they spread across much of the planet, I’m not going to lose any sleep about the possibility of breaching 1.5C global warming.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Good news from the abstract: “The available evidence does not yet indicate that the world has seriously committed to achieving the 1.5°C goal.”
And even if it wanted to, “the world” is powerless to do any such thing. Natural trends and cycles may push temperatures higher than that before it cools off again. No one knows for sure. But we have good evidence that non-condensing GHGs are not capable of driving the climate to a bad outcome. So let’s hope “the world” never seriously commits to what it cannot possibly achieve.
Last night, June 27th into the 28th, the overnight low was 47F (8C). The coming week is forecast decidedly cool in the Central Great Lakes region. A week after the summer solstice. The entire spring was cold. Planting of staple crops was delayed by weeks. I’m no statistician, but that would be in the range of cool normal in the real world I grew up in. But, is it in that same range of normal, or even possible in a “catastrophically warming planet” ? I think not. Will it be an issue in the media? I think not.
Under the CURRENT STRATEGY of the IPCC, net zero by 2050 cannot be achieved. It requires the inventions of new technologies which simply cannot be placed on any time schedule. These inventions include batteries made from materials that can be found in sufficient quantities from present resources, efficient carbon DIOXIDE capture and storage methods of long-term duration, fast charging technology, sufficient electrical generation and distribution systems, and more.
There are several technologies that might help achieve this but are now either discouraged or even forbidden. These include large scale construction of nuclear power plants, development of small scale dispatchable nuclear power, vast increases in rare earth mineral and copper mining and processing, Increased hydro power generation, and more as well.
The fact that the Warmists are not advocating any of this and are wasting vast resources on wind and solar power shows that they are not serious about meeting their own targets.
According to them, the world is going to warm up by a few tenths of a degree over the next 30 years, and this is supposed to be some form of catastrophe.
An increase of 1.25C since the bottom of the Little Ice Age has had no bad results. However a further 0.25C warming is gonna kill us all.
Are they actually trying to claim that 100% of the warming since the bottom of the LIA is due to human activity?
Of course CO2 didn’t rise in a significant amount until after most of that 1.25C increase had already occurred.
Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow (+/- 12 years) we’re fried!
LMFAO.
Battle?! What battle?!
Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees higher than the coldest period during modern civilization is only a “goal” to climate cultists. It’s a number somebody pulled out of their sphincter.
It took 100 years for the temperature to go up about 1 degree, and now they think they’ll see 50% of that in less than 30 years?! Don’t make me laugh any harder! Even if you believe CO2 to be the “driver” of anything, you would get less and less of an effect (purely hypothetically) as the levels climb.
This is what happens when so-called ‘scientists’ disregard all the inconvenient history they don’t like. THERE ARE NO ‘TIPPING POINTS.’ If 7000ppm didn’t do it, 400-something won’t either.
you are 100 percent correct
Wait… they’re calling it “global warming” again?
As there are no reported objective findings in the abstract to support the politically convenient conclusions, I will just assume the remainder of the paper is equally devoid of scientific enterprise.