This site is a reference point for those with a cool head for climate science, arguably the most political science ever. When the government and most of the media concentrate on alarmism, this site is the antidote for those who don't believe the scare stories - YOU ARE NOT ALONE! (blog started on 7/11/07) We have over 1.8 million hits and blog is updated regularly most weeks.
Friday 10 June 2022
DOES THE UKRAINE CONFLICT MEAN THE END OF THE NET ZERO PIPE-DREAM?
Here is an interesting article which argues that it does:
One has to deny science in order to not believe this. I didn't copy everything in this section should you want to read more. IPPC does not pay its scientists for the purpose of integrity.
The report quantifies climate sensitivity as between 2.5 °C (4.5 °F) and 4.0 °C (7.2 °F) for each doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,[6] while the best estimate is 3 °C.[24]: SPM-14 In all the represented Shared Socioeconomic Pathways the temperature reaches the 1.5 °C warming limit, at least for some period of time in the middle of the 21st century. However, Joeri Rogelj, director of the Grantham Institute and a lead IPCC author, said that it is possible to completely avoid warming of 1.5 °C, but to achieve that the world would need to cut emissions by 50% by the year 2030 and by 100% by the year 2050. If the world does not begin to drastically cut emissions by the time of the next report of the IPCC, then it will no longer be possible to prevent 1.5 °C of warming.[25] SSP1-1.9 is a new pathway with a rather low radiative forcing of 1.9 W/m2 in 2100 to model how people could keep warming below the 1.5 °C threshold. But, even in this scenario, the global temperature peaks at 1.6 °C in the years 2041–2060 and declines after.[23]
Your comment does not seem relevant to the article which says that, regardless of the science, the world has stopped giving as much attention to fighting climate change now that there is a serious war being fought in Ukraine.
RIght in the title. "It was a lame cold war substitute until the real war returned." Climate change happened in the past mostly due to co2 and sun. The sun hasn't changed recently, that leaves co2.
One has to deny science in order to not believe this. I didn't copy everything in this section should you want to read more. IPPC does not pay its scientists for the purpose of integrity.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Sixth_Assessment_Report#Findings
The report quantifies climate sensitivity as between 2.5 °C (4.5 °F) and 4.0 °C (7.2 °F) for each doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,[6] while the best estimate is 3 °C.[24]: SPM-14 In all the represented Shared Socioeconomic Pathways the temperature reaches the 1.5 °C warming limit, at least for some period of time in the middle of the 21st century. However, Joeri Rogelj, director of the Grantham Institute and a lead IPCC author, said that it is possible to completely avoid warming of 1.5 °C, but to achieve that the world would need to cut emissions by 50% by the year 2030 and by 100% by the year 2050. If the world does not begin to drastically cut emissions by the time of the next report of the IPCC, then it will no longer be possible to prevent 1.5 °C of warming.[25] SSP1-1.9 is a new pathway with a rather low radiative forcing of 1.9 W/m2 in 2100 to model how people could keep warming below the 1.5 °C threshold. But, even in this scenario, the global temperature peaks at 1.6 °C in the years 2041–2060 and declines after.[23]
Your comment does not seem relevant to the article which says that, regardless of the science, the world has stopped giving as much attention to fighting climate change now that there is a serious war being fought in Ukraine.
ReplyDeleteRIght in the title. "It was a lame cold war substitute until the real war returned." Climate change happened in the past mostly due to co2 and sun. The sun hasn't changed recently, that leaves co2.
Delete