Government Told To Prepare For 2C Warming By 2050 (bbc.com)
- Reference: 0179800414
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/10/15/171238/government-told-to-prepare-for-2c-warming-by-2050
- Source link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx24kllyye1o
> The country was "not yet adapted" to worsening weather extremes already occurring at current levels of warming, "let alone" what was expected to come, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) wrote in a letter addressed to the government.
>
> The committee said they would advise that the UK prepare for climate change beyond the long-term temperature goal set out in the Paris Agreement. The letter came as the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirmed that 2024 had seen a record rise of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. CO2 is the gas mainly responsible for human-caused climate change and is released when fossil fuels are burnt, as well as other activities.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx24kllyye1o
We Really Mean It, This Time. (Score:3, Funny)
First: Only 10 more years. (We're already supposed to be past this point fighting for life on a dying planet.)
Then: Only 15 more years.
Now: ONLY 25 MORE YEARS!!!!
Re: (Score:1)
MAGA types cherry-pick past forecasts to paint all forecasts as extreme. Being Evil With Data
Re: (Score:2)
> MAGA types cherry-pick past forecasts to paint all forecasts as extreme.
Not even. They make up forecasts that never existed.
> Being Evil With Data
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you're positing that our actions in response to climate change have been impactful enough to delay the increase but not sufficient to stop it?
Re: (Score:2)
You're a very poor liar, every bit if your nonsense is easily falsifiable.
Even back in 1990, when the models and computations were significantly less mature, [1]the IPCC estimated ~0.3C of warming per decade in the 21st century. [wikipedia.org]
Are you capable of the mental arithmetic to project to 2050 from 1990?
Measured temperatures have demonstrated acceleration [2]beyond those initial projections [climate.gov] (I'm surprised the current administration/ignorance cult hasn't deleted the NOAA page).
You're a toddler with oppositional d
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_First_Assessment_Report
[2] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature
Re: Yeah we are past the point you idiot (Score:2)
Sick and tired of cuddling yet you typed a huge wall of text. Have fun staying in a perpetual state of loom and gloom. The climate will be fine long after you and I are gone. Inflation is literally reducing birthrates and making us go extinct and you idiots still eat up the government climate propaganda slop and pretend the science can be trusted. It's like you learned nothing from covid.
Who said that? [Re:We Really Mean It, This Time.] (Score:2)
> First: Only 10 more years. (We're already supposed to be past this point fighting for life on a dying planet.)
Citation needed. Who said, "only 10 more years"... and, ten more years for what ?
For reference, the very first IPCC report (1990) said nothing of the sort; they did give a few model predictions for 2030, which is to say 40 years in the future (of when the report came out), not "only 10". You might try reading it, if you want to know what actual scientists predicted. To help you, here's the first working group: [1]https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar1... [www.ipcc.ch]
> Then: Only 15 more years.
Fifteen more years for what? Citation needed. Who said that, wh
[1] https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar1/wg1/
AMOC halt would totally (Score:1)
...screw the UK. Even Eskimos wouldn't visit.
2C don't sound impressive (Score:2)
You probably need to simulate the climate and come up with individual numbers and all that to sell it well.
Ideally (and a bit counterintuitively), you probably would need some sort of application that explain what will happen on a region you test, so people that only care about themselves can see what will happen to them specifically.
No one care about polar bears for more than 5 minutes, but a "due all the chain reactions, you're 20C warmer than it would normally" is more convincing.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, and FWIW, 2C is probably an underestimate, like most of the forecasts. The official forecasters never want to sound too extreme.
OTOH, it still depends on what we (as a world civilization) do. So far we've kept raising our CO2 discharges, but we *could* reverse that.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed.
But i mean more like the headlines themselves, if someone reads "2C warmer", sounds like a nothingburger, when in reality there are all the pretty horrible domino effects.
These need better marketing than annoying and condescending rich people.
Re: (Score:2)
> You probably need to simulate the climate and come up with individual numbers and all that to sell it well. Ideally (and a bit counterintuitively), you probably would need some sort of application that explain what will happen on a region you test, so people that only care about themselves can see what will happen to them specifically.
Unfortunately, the smaller region you are predicting, the harder it is. It's (comparatively) easy to predict a global average; much much more difficult (and more uncertain) to predict fine details.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, i know.
We'll likely see worse then 2C eventually (Score:2)
As a planet (the only way it makes sense to look at this) we're only now getting close to halting our yearly increase in total emissions. We haven't even begun the process of actually reducing this massive number. Meanwhile there are all sorts of things we don't even know how to decarbonize.
Best case scenario in my mind is that we're 30-50 years away from net zero. I'm in my mid 40's now, given that we already seem to be getting close to the 1.5C benchmark I fully expect a 3C total increase before I die.
In other news (Score:2)
The world can't manage to handle the tragedy of the commons situation. It's not me, it's them!
But nuclear is too slow (Score:1)
Just compare my states carbon output - [1]https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/US-CAL-CISO/12mo/monthly [electricitymaps.com]
With that of France - [2]https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/FR/12mo/monthly [electricitymaps.com]
France is at 19 g CO2 per kWh compared most of California at 242 g CO2 per kWh.
Clearly nuclear is needed.
[1] https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/US-CAL-CISO/12mo/monthly
[2] https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/FR/12mo/monthly
Could be worse. (Score:2)
If it was in Fahrenheit it would a 3.6 degrees of warming, so another reason to switch to the Metric System: it'll be cooler. :-)
Re: (Score:3)
The Medieval Warm Period was NOT a global phenomenon. This is why we should care. And currently there Billions of people that live in equatoral zones that will become uninhabitable resulting in massive migrations, social upheaval, mass misery and as always poverty.
Re: (Score:3)
> The Medieval Warm Period was NOT a global phenomenon.
Right. Globally, it was not noticibly different in temperature.
But also, we have already surpassed the European Medieval Warm Period temperatures.
Thanks to (Score:2)
Thanks to the brilliant Climate Regulation changes by Trump, this will not happen. he assures us. How do we know ? Climate Stats where eliminated, that means the Average Temp will never change. /s
Thanks Trump
Re: (Score:2)
It can't get warmer if there is no thermometer to read.
Now why should the US care? (Score:2)
Trump will be gone by that time and that is what dictates the US's concern horizon. /s
obligatory XKCD (Score:2)
[1]https://xkcd.com/1732/ [xkcd.com]
[1] https://xkcd.com/1732/
Or... (Score:2)
the melting arctic and Greenland ice pack screws up the Atlantic conveyor current and Britain and Scandinavia have a new ice age.
That's nice and all (Score:2)
But that's going to get in the way of burning more coal for this new AI datacenter.