Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumSurvivable IPCC projections are based on science fiction - the reality is much worse
The IPCC's 'Representative Concentration Pathways' are based on fantasy technology that must draw massive volumes of CO2 out of the atmosphere late this century, writes Nick Breeze - an unjustified hope that conceals a very bleak future for Earth, and humanity.Survivable IPCC projections are based on science fiction - the reality is much worse
Of the four shown RCP's only one keeps us within the range that climate scientists regard as survivable. This is RCP 2.6 that has a projected temperature range of 0.9°C and 2.3°C.
It is quite clear that we have no carbon budget whatsoever. The account, far from being in surplus, is horrendously overdrawn. To claim we have a few decades of safely burning coal, oil and gas is an utter nonsense.
In February 2015 the National Research Council in the United States launched their two reports on "climate interventions". Dr Nutt concluded with this statement on CDR (Carbon Dioxide Removal):
"Carbon Dioxide Removal strategies offer the potential to decrease carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere but they are limited right now by their slow response, by their inability to scale up and their high cost."
Dr Nutt's conclusion points to very important factor that we can elaborate on with a rare case of certainty. There is no proposed CDR technology that can be scaled up to suck billions of tonnes out of the Earth's atmosphere. It simply does not exist in the real world.
Of the four shown RCP's only one keeps us within the range that climate scientists regard as survivable. This is RCP 2.6 that has a projected temperature range of 0.9°C and 2.3°C.
It is quite clear that we have no carbon budget whatsoever. The account, far from being in surplus, is horrendously overdrawn. To claim we have a few decades of safely burning coal, oil and gas is an utter nonsense.
In February 2015 the National Research Council in the United States launched their two reports on "climate interventions". Dr Nutt concluded with this statement on CDR (Carbon Dioxide Removal):
"Carbon Dioxide Removal strategies offer the potential to decrease carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere but they are limited right now by their slow response, by their inability to scale up and their high cost."
Dr Nutt's conclusion points to very important factor that we can elaborate on with a rare case of certainty. There is no proposed CDR technology that can be scaled up to suck billions of tonnes out of the Earth's atmosphere. It simply does not exist in the real world.
We have front row seats for the unstoppable destruction of an entire planetary biosphere. What an amazing time to be alive!
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
7 replies, 1325 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (24)
ReplyReply to this post
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Survivable IPCC projections are based on science fiction - the reality is much worse (Original Post)
GliderGuider
Feb 2015
OP
orwell
(7,775 posts)1. Earth just doesn't have the votes...
...n/t
rgbecker
(4,834 posts)2. It's going to be fun....
but I'm concerned for my 2 year old grandson. Seems like such a waste of a great gene pool which has been handed down for thousands or is it millions of years.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)3. kick, kick, kick.....
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)4. There's survivable, and then there's survivable, though
H. sapiens has a pretty long lifespan ahead of it.
You see, we're adaptable. I don't mean that as in "we can make the technology!" I mean it in a biological sense, we are medium-sized animals with large brains, non-specialized body plans, and wide-open omnivorous diets. Our species history shows that we are capable of adapting ourselves to extremes of environment. What our biological adaptations can't cover, technology can - and by technology, I mean "sharp sticks and animal peelings."
Our societies, and hte entore world as we understand it, however, that's all doomed. nations, kaput. Cities? Holy shit, death traps and haunted ruins, to become ivy-and-kudzu piles of rubble. Our technology? If it needs more than a stick and a dead critter, it's done for. Our environment will of course become unrecognizable to current people - Our world will basically be reverting to the Miocene (or if we're really unlucky, the late Triassic). Lots of other, more specialized species are going to die out en masse, of course.
We'll be sharing a world torn between desert and jungle, populated by rats, roaches, jellyfish, and ourselves.. .but our species will still be there. And eventually the rats and our ancestors will diversify. My money is on rats evolving into apex predator roles faster than we can. All they have to do is get bigger, after all.
You see, we're adaptable. I don't mean that as in "we can make the technology!" I mean it in a biological sense, we are medium-sized animals with large brains, non-specialized body plans, and wide-open omnivorous diets. Our species history shows that we are capable of adapting ourselves to extremes of environment. What our biological adaptations can't cover, technology can - and by technology, I mean "sharp sticks and animal peelings."
Our societies, and hte entore world as we understand it, however, that's all doomed. nations, kaput. Cities? Holy shit, death traps and haunted ruins, to become ivy-and-kudzu piles of rubble. Our technology? If it needs more than a stick and a dead critter, it's done for. Our environment will of course become unrecognizable to current people - Our world will basically be reverting to the Miocene (or if we're really unlucky, the late Triassic). Lots of other, more specialized species are going to die out en masse, of course.
We'll be sharing a world torn between desert and jungle, populated by rats, roaches, jellyfish, and ourselves.. .but our species will still be there. And eventually the rats and our ancestors will diversify. My money is on rats evolving into apex predator roles faster than we can. All they have to do is get bigger, after all.
Telcontar
(660 posts)5. Sensationalist claptrap
Never bet against Mankind. An ice age is harder to survive and we made it.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)7. No one ever drowned in ice. And ice keeps the microbes, parasites, insects at bay. Think emerging
super bugs are a problem now. Just wait.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)6. ,
,
