climate change

    by Mike Perry (http://nodicemike.com)

We still have to stop CO₂ emissions and plant trees to prevent even worse catastrophes, but since 2022 the most likely future is that there will be catastrophes even if we stop CO₂ emissions right now. This is what climate scientists in the past 30 years hoped to prevent. We failed. Now we must fight to avoid even worse outcomes. We are making progress at that, but we must speed up.

Update 2022: As by the WMO, we’re now at 50% within the next 5 years: “⚀ or ⚁ or ⚂” (1 or 2 or 3). “The odds of at least one of the next 5 years temporarily reaching the Paris Agreement threshold of 1.5°C have increased to 50:50. In 2015 the chance was zero.”

Update (2021-09): According to IPCC AR6, we’re now at 50%.

Update 2018-09-03: As by Aengenheyster et al. 2018, we’re now at “⚀ or ⚁” (1 or 2): »However, reaching the 1.5 K target appears unlikely as MM would be required to start in 2018 for a probability of 67%.« MM means getting a 2% increase of the share of renewables every year.

I don’t know what we rolled, but I sure hope it’s not a 1.¹

For the robust science behind the green future, see Hansen et al. 2017:

Young people's burden: requirement of negative CO₂ emissions.

Report: Arctic Is Unraveling, discusses assessment Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost, notes the article rising tide — sounds more like Hansen was right.

I just discussed with “sceptics” on twitter about climate change. There Ronan Connolly ‏(@RonanConnolly) showed me his article which tries to give the impression that there is no scientific consensus about climate change being man-made.