[kublikhan]

I think the point is not that we are at 1.5C or 2.0C but that the in rease will continue for some rather long time.

If we stopped TODAY, went to net zero today what would the ultimate temperature rise be and when?

Anyone gave an estimated range?

This article discusses that issue:

Matthews and Weaver found that, in a constant concentration scenario, the world would continue to warm by around 0.3C by 2200 – with some additional warming in centuries to come as the deep oceans continued to slowly warm. Given that the world has already warmed by around 1.3C, this means that the 1.5C limit would be breached, if current CO2 concentrations are held steady due to some continued emissions. By contrast, they suggested that temperatures would stabilise in a world of net-zero emissions, remaining roughly at the level they were when emissions ceased.

The different meanings of net-zero emissions
While much of the focus of climate mitigation efforts is on CO2, human emissions of other GHGs and aerosols also have a large impact on global surface temperatures. And whereas global temperatures will stabilise once CO2 emissions fall to zero, the same is not true for zero GHG or aerosol emissions.

Human emissions of aerosols – tiny particles of sulfur or nitrogen suspended in the atmosphere that reflect incoming sunlight back to space – have a strong cooling effect on the planet, though there are large uncertainties as to exactly how large this effect is. Aerosols also have a relatively short atmospheric lifetime and, if emissions cease, the aerosols currently in the atmosphere will quickly fall back out. As a result, the world would be around 0.4C warmer if CO2 and aerosol emissions go to zero, compared to zero CO2 emissions alone. In this scenario (red line), the world would likely exceed the 1.5C target, reaching around 1.75C by 2100.

Explainer: Will global warming ‘stop’ as soon as net-zero emissions are reached?

[Plantagenet]

Matthews and Weaver found that, in a constant concentration scenario, the world would continue to warm by around 0.3C by 2200 – with some additional warming in centuries to come as the deep oceans continued to slowly warm.

Yes, but back here in the real world huge amounts of additional anthropogenic CO2 are going into the atmosphere every year.



Models assuming a "constant concentration" of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere aren't meaningful for predicting what will happen to our planet in the future because they are based on unrealistic assumptions.

Cheers!

[theluckycountry]

Yes, but back here in the real world huge amounts of additional anthropogenic CO2 are going into the atmosphere every year.

Lol. Well kublick will be safely in the grave long before the world gets too bad. Unless of course he's killed in a super-hurricane meanwhile, or a flood, or dies in a heatwave.

I love the way the denial camp switched from "It's not happening" to "Well the climate is always changing, so what?"

[Plantagenet]

Well kublikhan will be safely in the grave long before the world gets too bad. Unless of course he's killed in a super-hurricane meanwhile, or a flood, or dies in a heatwave.
I love the way the denial camp switched from "It's not happening" to "Well the climate is always changing, so what?"

YUP.

And some of the others in the denialist camp switched to "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about. The world should just keep on doing business as usual."

And in China, where most of the Lithium gets processed for EV batteries and most of the world's EV cars are rolling around, they just permitted another 2000 coal-fired power plants to provide energy to those EVs and lithium mines and factories.


China continues to rapidly build new coal fired power plants. China now emits THREE TIMES more CO2 than the USA, so they can mine and process lithium for the EV industry!!!!

So where exactly do the carbon emissions reductions come from, when so much electricity is actually generated by burning coal???????

Cheers!

[kublikhan]

Lol. Well kublick will be safely in the grave long before the world gets too bad. Unless of course he's killed in a super-hurricane meanwhile, or a flood, or dies in a heatwave.

I love the way the denial camp switched from "It's not happening" to "Well the climate is always changing, so what?"

What the hell are you talking about? I am not now, nor have I ever been "in the denial camp". I have never said anything like "it's not happening" nor "Well the climate is always changing, so what?" As usual, you are talking out of your ass. For the 16+ years I have been posting here all of my posts on global warming have taken the position that global warming is very real. An earlier poster asked a hypothetical question and I answered it, that's it. I never thought nor claimed "global warming is not happening."

YUP.

And some of the others in the denialist camp switched to "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about. The world should just keep on doing business as usual."

Once again, I am not in the denial camp. Nor have I ever said anything like "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about." In fact, I said the opposite in the EV thread.

[ralfy]

Reminds me of that bit of info about CO2 being incredibly high in the distant past, but even then it rose at only around 30 ppm per thousand years.

Now, it's rising at 1 ppm per year.

[AdamB]

I love the way the denial camp switched from "It's not happening" to "Well the climate is always changing, so what?"

As usual, the simpleton version reveals lack of nuance.
The climate always changing is a fact, not an excuse. The denial camp isn't a camp, in some cases, like the "deniers" who knew peak oil earlier in this century was a crock, they are just run of the mill experts who know better than to fall for nonsense shoveled to the gullible on the internet.

[AdamB]

And some of the others in the denialist camp switched to "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about. The world should just keep on doing business as usual."

And some in the retired student babysitting camp pretend that their globe trotting isn't contributing to the problem they express faux concern over.

What EV owner has ever told you because they drive one, there isn't anything to worry about? Not this one. Considering how few EVs are in Alaska, do you even know anyone who owns them and tells you there is nothing to worry about? Or is this another scientifically accurate claim that is just make believe?

[mousepad]

IMHO there's a good chance we are going to see large scale crop failures and then major famine as the climate continues to warm and change.

There's too many people as is, so I take your point as good news.

[Plantagenet]

IMHO there's a good chance we are going to see large scale crop failures and then major famine as the climate continues to warm and change.

There's too many people as is, so I take your point as good news.

By itself it possibly would be good news.

But its unlikely that people and even entire countries will sit and do nothing as their populations starve.

We just don't know what the knock-on effects will be.

For instance, If crop failures occur in central America, will it lead to millions of illegal aliens flooding into the US?---Oh wait that is already happening....

Or if drought affects Africa and causes crop failures will it drive immigrants to Europe---Oh wait that is already happening

So what will happen if droughts and famines get even worse?

How about if US farmland in the midwest becomes unfarmable due to drought, will the US move to take over Canadian farmland that is farther north....

Of if land in China is hit with global warming and crop failure, will China try to take over Siberia just to its north.....

Or if crop failures occur in India and Pakistan, will it lead to a nuclear exchange?

Those kinds of events wouldn't be as welcome, IMHO.



Cheers!

[Newfie]

Lol. Well kublick will be safely in the grave long before the world gets too bad. Unless of course he's killed in a super-hurricane meanwhile, or a flood, or dies in a heatwave.

I love the way the denial camp switched from "It's not happening" to "Well the climate is always changing, so what?"

What the hell are you talking about? I am not now, nor have I ever been "in the denial camp". I have never said anything like "it's not happening" nor "Well the climate is always changing, so what?" As usual, you are talking out of your ass. For the 16+ years I have been posting here all of my posts on global warming have taken the position that global warming is very real. An earlier poster asked a hypothetical question and I answered it, that's it. I never thought nor claimed "global warming is not happening."

YUP.

And some of the others in the denialist camp switched to "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about. The world should just keep on doing business as usual."

Once again, I am not in the denial camp. Nor have I ever said anything like "I drive an EV, so there's nothing to worry about." In fact, I said the opposite in the EV thread.

Kub and Plant,

Thanks for your attempt to provide an answer. Much appreciated.

What I did not see addressed was methane release from the permanent frost, loss of the Amazon, and other factors.

Perhaps they are just too complicated for the models?

[kublikhan]

Thanks for your attempt to provide an answer. Much appreciated.

What I did not see addressed was methane release from the permanent frost, loss of the Amazon, and other factors.

Perhaps they are just too complicated for the models?

It talks a little about methane and melting permafrost and has a link to another article discussing the issue in more detail. But like Planty said, net zero GHG emissions anytime soon are a highly unlikely scenario and we are going in the opposite direction of rising emissions. But from a purely academic point of view:

Even in a world of zero CO2 emissions, however, there are large remaining uncertainties associated with what happens to non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as methane and nitrous oxide, emissions of sulphate aerosols that cool the planet and longer-term feedback processes and natural variability in the climate system.

Other GHGs are also important drivers of global warming. Human-caused emissions of methane, in particular, account for about a quarter of the historical warming that the world has experienced. Unlike CO2, methane has a short atmospheric lifetime, such that emissions released today will mostly disappear from the atmosphere after 12 years. This is the main reason why the world would cool notably by 2100 if all GHG emissions fell to zero. This would result in around 0.5C of cooling compared to a scenario where only CO2 falls to zero. Finally, if all human emissions that affect climate change fall to zero – including GHGs and aerosols – then the IPCC results suggest there would be a short-term 20-year bump in warming followed by a longer-term decline. This reflects the opposing impacts of warming as aerosols drop out of the atmosphere versus cooling from falling methane levels.

The studies featured in this piece all look at the effects of zero-emissions scenarios today or in the next few decades. If, however, zero emissions were to occur later in the century, there is the potential to lock in more carbon-cycle feedback processes – such as melting permafrost – than under current global temperature levels. A world that has warmed by 3C or 4C above pre-industrial levels may lock in more committed future warming than today’s world – and more research is needed to explore these effects. Finally, while current best estimates suggest that temperatures will stabilise in a zero-emissions world, that does not mean that all climate impacts would cease to worsen. Melting glaciers and ice sheets and rising sea levels all occur slowly and lag behind surface temperature warming. A zero-emissions world would still result in rising sea levels for many centuries to come, with some estimates suggesting that at least 80cm of additional sea level rise is “locked in”.

Will global warming ‘stop’ as soon as net-zero emissions are reached?

Carbon release from permafrost
So, what role will permafrost play in future carbon emissions? And is there a tipping point that could trigger rapid thaw?

Scientists estimate that there is about twice as much carbon stored in permafrost as circulating in the atmosphere. This is approximately 1460bn-1600bn tonnes of carbon. Most of it is currently frozen and preserved, but if even a small fraction is released into the atmosphere, the emissions would likely be large – potentially similar in magnitude to carbon release from other environmental fluxes, such as deforestation.

This would still be about one order of magnitude smaller than emissions from fossil-fuel burning by the end of this century. Nevertheless, every additional molecule of CO2 or methane added to the atmosphere accelerates climate change and affects the whole planet and its climate.

To our current knowledge, carbon release from permafrost is a gradual and sustained process that continually adds carbon to the atmosphere – thus, further reinforcing warming. Once the organic matter within permafrost decomposes and releases CO2 and methane, there is no getting it back. In this sense, permafrost thaw is irreversible – meeting one of the conditions of the definition of a tipping point. However, recent research suggests that if temperature rise were to slow and stop, permafrost thaw, too, would slow – and potentially stop, thus, limiting further emissions. Nonetheless, this would take some time. Permafrost thaw is a bit like a heavy freight train – once it is moving, it can’t be stopped immediately. And even after putting on the brakes, it will continue to roll onwards for a while. Research suggests that emissions could continue for decades to centuries even once permafrost thaw has slowed down.

And as the recent special report on the ocean and cryosphere by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) points out, warming this century will cause substantial emissions from permafrost: “By 2100, near-surface permafrost area will decrease by 2-66% for RCP2.6 and 30–99% for RCP8.5. This could release 10s to 100s of gigatonnes of carbon as CO2 and methane to the atmosphere for RCP8.5, with the potential to accelerate climate change.”

The irreversible emissions of a permafrost ‘tipping point’

[Plantagenet]

Release of some CO2 and CH4 from thawing permafrost is already happening.......and it's certain to increase as the planet continues to warm.

But the feedback effect that I find most concerning right are the huge releases of CO2 from burning forests.

Its pretty clear to see that more global warming is leading to more persistent heat domes and more forest fires as the climate warms, and the release of CO2 from the forest fires will inevitably increase global warming leading to more and more forest fires and more CO2 release and more etc. etc....

AND this release of CO2 can happen much more rapidly than thawing the permafrost.

The number of forest fires is just exploding in forest areas all across the world....and every large forest fire IMMEDIATELY pumps a whole lot more CO2 into the air.

Canada sets all-time record emissions of CO2 from forest fires this year.....with 3 months of summer still to go

It's a perfect positive feedback loop.....positive in the sense that greater warming leads to more fires leads to more CO2 releases leads to more global warming.....etc. etc.

Several years ago I had a huge academic argument with another scientist who claimed Greenhouse Warming was nothing to worry about because we could just plant more forests and the trees would pump down CO2 from the atmosphere and save the planet. I told him he was wrong and it was far more likely we would see future warming cause forest loss in many areas that would offset any potential CO2 uptake by trees. I was expecting warming and droughts to cause local ecosystem collapse at ecotone boundaries over a period of decades, resulting in an overall net loss of forest biome, but the massive forest fires we are suddenly seeing around the world will do an even quicker job of destroying huge swathes of forest and releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the air then I was predicting back then........


Huge Forest fires are releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere from forests around the world........this is a very rapid process that will immediately put more CO2 into the atmosphere and cause even MORE global warming.

Cheers!

[Plantagenet]

Its looking like Phoenix is going to set a whole lot of heat records.

Meanwhile another massive heat dome is forming right now over south-central Europe and Italy may also be on the verge of setting all time record highs.

And of course in Asia everything is going to be hot as hell as well.

With any luck we're going to see simultaneous record highs in Asia, the SW USA, and also Europe.

And what will our senile President and his feckless administration do in response to all this record global warming happening on his watch?

Oh thats right---they're all busy right now covering up for a mysterious Cocaine addict who forgot his dime bag in the White House.....


Don't bother me with anything important right now....I'm too busy covering up for Hunter again......

Cheers!

[AdamB]

And what will our senile President and his feckless administration do in response to all this record global warming happening on his watch?

The same thing the last senile traitor President and feckless administration did...nothing.

[theluckycountry]

Its looking like Phoenix is going to set a whole lot of heat records.

Meanwhile another massive heat dome is forming right now over south-central Europe and Italy may also be on the verge of setting all time record highs.

I wonder what's happening to home values in such areas plant? I know for a fact that where sea level rise is encroaching on suburbs, Miami, prices are going down down down. It's not a stretch to image people fleeing en-mass to cooler climates if they can afford it.

There was this niche little region up in the mountains behind Queensland's Gold Coast, called Springbrook, that saw massive decreases in property values after one of the only two roads up to it was washed out and not repaired for 2 years. I think the government figured because they had an alternate way down (and the population was quite small, 2000 odd) that it was a low priority. Trouble was the other way off the mountain led into the back country and added over an hours drive for those who worked and took their kids to school down on the coast.

I think we will see more and more of this in the years ahead.

[theluckycountry]

Farmers Insurance is leaving Florida in latest blow to homeowners

Another insurer is leaving Florida, where homeowners are paying more than ever for insurance, despite the state’s attempt to shore up the wobbling market.

On Tuesday, Farmers Insurance informed the state it was dropping home, auto and umbrella policies across Florida, potentially affecting tens of thousands of people. It’s the fourth company to leave the Florida market in the last year — most citing rising risks from hurricanes. Farmers, a large company with a national presence, also has reduced new business in California, citing extreme weather and wildfire threats.

https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/ ... insolvent/

[Tuike]

Cerberus heatwave: Why is it so hot in Europe and how long will it last? -euronews
Southern Europe getting scorched.

[theluckycountry]

The science behind GW was laid out over 100 years ago and anyone can reproduce it at home with a fishtank, a heat lamp, and a bottle of CO2. The rate of increase of CO2 is also well documented and not open to debate. Possibly the only thing open to debate is the historical records from things like ice cores that reveal the levels back when the earth was much hotter, the oceans much higher.

But we really don't need to know what happened in past geological ages to explain why the all the world's glaciers are melting, why the giant antarctic ice sheets are breaking up, why arctic temperatures way above average, why super typhoons are devastating the pacific or insurance companies are abandoning fire zones and regions plagued by destructive storms in the US.

Antarctica, Arctic hit temperatures 40 C and 30 C hotter than normal
Jan 29, 2022

Both of the Earth’s poles have been experiencing extreme heat events at the same time, and scientists are calling it “not a good sign.”
Parts of Antarctica are more than 40 C warmer than average for this time of year, while areas of the Arctic are more than 30 C warmer than average.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8698454/anta ... s-records/

But of course to the denialists sitting in their lounge rooms in the suburbs of America this means nothing "It's not hot here, what are you on about?"

Round and round it goes, and by the time it gets back to where it began it's forgotten what it saw last time.

[Newfie]

Ev n boiling frogs will get uncomfortable, after a while.