Three years left to limit warming to 1.5C, leading scientists warn

Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4l927dj5zo
Credit: Mark Poynting, Climate Reporter, BBC News
Archive: https://archive.ph/BY8ep

54e69b00-4c27-11f0-ac5b-1dcff18d9d54.jpg.webp

The Earth could be doomed to breach the symbolic 1.5C warming limit in as little as three years at current levels of carbon dioxide emissions.

That's the stark warning from more than 60 of the world's leading climate scientists in the most up-to-date assessment of the state of global warming.

Nearly 200 countries agreed to try to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C above levels of the late 1800s in a landmark agreement in 2015, with the aim of avoiding some of the worst impacts of climate change.

But countries have continued to burn record amounts of coal, oil and gas and chop down carbon-rich forests - leaving that international goal in peril.

Climate change has already worsened many weather extremes - such as the UK's 40C heat in July 2022 - and has rapidly raised global sea levels, threatening coastal communities.

"Things are all moving in the wrong direction," said lead author Prof Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures at the University of Leeds.

"We're seeing some unprecedented changes and we're also seeing the heating of the Earth and sea-level rise accelerating as well."

These changes "have been predicted for some time and we can directly place them back to the very high level of emissions", he added.

At the beginning of 2020, scientists estimated that humanity could only emit 500 billion more tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) - the most important planet-warming gas - for a 50% chance of keeping warming to 1.5C.

But by the start of 2025 this so-called "carbon budget" had shrunk to 130 billion tonnes, according to the new study.

That reduction is largely due to continued record emissions of CO2 and other planet-warming greenhouse gases like methane, but also improvements in the scientific estimates.

If global CO2 emissions stay at their current highs of about 40 billion tonnes a year, 130 billion tonnes gives the world roughly three years until that carbon budget is exhausted.

This could commit the world to breaching the target set by the Paris agreement, the researchers say, though the planet would probably not pass 1.5C of human-caused warming until a few years later.

a8cfc080-4c44-11f0-a466-d54f65b60deb.png.webp

Last year was the first on record when global average air temperatures were more than 1.5C above those of the late 1800s.

A single 12-month period isn't considered a breach of the Paris agreement, however, with the record heat of 2024 given an extra boost by natural weather patterns.

But human-caused warming was by far the main reason for last year's high temperatures, reaching 1.36C above pre-industrial levels, the researchers estimate.

This current rate of warming is about 0.27C per decade – much faster than anything in the geological record.

And if emissions stay high, the planet is on track to reach 1.5C of warming on that metric around the year 2030.

After this point, long-term warming could, in theory, be brought back down by sucking large quantities of CO2 back out of the atmosphere.

But the authors urge caution on relying on these ambitious technologies serving as a get-out-of-jail card.

"For larger exceedance [of 1.5C], it becomes less likely that removals [of CO2] will perfectly reverse the warming caused by today's emissions," warned Joeri Rogelj, professor of climate science and policy at Imperial College London.

'Every fraction of warming' matters​


The study is filled with striking statistics highlighting the magnitude of the climate change that has already happened.

Perhaps the most notable is the rate at which extra heat is accumulating in the Earth's climate system, known as "Earth's energy imbalance" in scientific jargon.

Over the past decade or so, this rate of heating has been more than double that of the 1970s and 1980s and an estimated 25% higher than the late 2000s and 2010s.

"That's a really large number, a very worrying number" over such a short period, said Dr Matthew Palmer of the UK Met Office, and associate professor at the University of Bristol.

The recent uptick is fundamentally due to greenhouse gas emissions, but a reduction in the cooling effect from small particles called aerosols has also played a role.

This extra energy has to go somewhere. Some goes into warming the land, raising air temperatures, and melting the world's ice.

But about 90% of the excess heat is taken up by the oceans.

That not only means disruption to marine life but also higher sea levels: warmer ocean waters take up more space, in addition to the extra water that melting glaciers are adding to our seas.

The rate of global sea-level rise has doubled since the 1990s, raising the risks of flooding for millions of people living in coastal areas worldwide.

72d5e860-4d02-11f0-9d3e-6149fb67e70c.jpg.webp

Sea-level rise increases the chances of coastal flooding during storms

While this all paints a bleak picture, the authors note that the rate of emissions increases appears to be slowing as clean technologies are rolled out.

They argue that "rapid and stringent" emissions cuts are more important than ever.

The Paris target is based on very strong scientific evidence that the impacts of climate change would be far greater at 2C of warming than at 1.5C.

That has often been oversimplified as meaning below 1.5C of warming is "safe" and above 1.5C "dangerous".

In reality, every extra bit of warming increases the severity of many weather extremes, ice melt and sea-level rise.

"Reductions in emissions over the next decade can critically change the rate of warming," said Prof Rogelj.

"Every fraction of warming that we can avoid will result in less harm and less suffering of particularly poor and vulnerable populations and less challenges for our societies to live the lives that we desire," he added.
 
But I don't see how one hot day is newsworthy even if it's unusual. Hot days happen just as cold days do. Your infrastructure can cope for a day
If you had come in with this, I would have agreed and just moved on. My problem is that you came in with the most stale, braindead take of lol euros can't take heat that every single fucking muttard posts every time they're faced with the reality that different parts of the world have different heat tolerances. It got old six days after the internet was invented.
 
If you had come in with this, I would have agreed and just moved on. My problem is that you came in with the most stale, braindead take of lol euros can't take heat that every single fucking muttard posts every time they're faced with the reality that different parts of the world have different heat tolerances. It got old six days after the internet was invented.
Your media does you no favors man. Just saying.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Hard Toothbrush
To be fair, the west also did its share of polluting, just earlier on. Industrialization is why we became "developed" and since India and China (dunno bout africa) are still technically "developing" they use that as a clapback against criticism
That's just the usual Marxist bullshit that is used to justify fucking over Western countries. The difference is that we developed all of the technologies underlying industrialised society from scratch, while 'developing' countries just have to copy what we've already done and given to them, largely without thanks. And then we're still guilt tripped into funding the construction of wells in Africa, because obviously they can't dig a hole in the ground themselves because of colonialism or some shit.
 
Science damnit goy! You're all going to die if you dont submit yourself to serfdom at our great benefactor who has financed our research lord gates' farmlands now noW nOW NOW NOW!!!!!!
 
Fun fact, Jimmy Carter was the first person to publicly claim that we have 50 years left and that was in 1977. So why bother, we will all be dead and out of gas and oil in 2 years. 2027 is when the world ends. Adios amigos :(
 
Fun fact, Jimmy Carter was the first person to publicly claim that we have 50 years left and that was in 1977. So why bother, we will all be dead and out of gas and oil in 2 years. 2027 is when the world ends. Adios amigos :(
Though that does highlight a problem with human psychology that kinda necessitated the dire prediction model in the first place. 50 years is too far off to effectively conceptualize as urgent, kids don't have a concept of that far off and will consider it "the future" while adults? Given 50 years? Well, to quote Cave Johnson (of all people!) "The median latency on asbestos poisoning is 44 years, so, if you're over 30? You're laughing. At most you miss out on a couple rounds of canasta".

They had to "fudge" those numbers a bit to get everyone on board with "this is a problem and it's gonna strike in your own lifetime so you can't ignore it" pleading. While it was probably all good-intentioned to start with? That quickly changed as the fudging became intrinsic to the discipline, eventually reaching the modern point where it's been revised down to an ever-resetting 3-5 year deadline that never comes true.

Ironically? This means NOBODY, not young and not old, takes it seriously because they've all seen the doomsday predictions fail multiple times.
 
This means NOBODY, not young and not old, takes it seriously because they've all seen the doomsday predictions fail multiple times.
You'd be surprised. I had two people just this month quoting this figure at me.
Though that does highlight a problem with human psychology that kinda necessitated the dire prediction model in the first place.
We always enjoyed disaster porn. It started with the radio broadcast of War of the World, then movies like Armageddon, The Day After Tomorrow, Moonfall or even Independence Day. It's funny also how people overreacted about Covid after being fed disaster movies about pandemics and zombies for decades: Contagion (2012) obviously comes to mind but also I Am a Legend, 28 Days Later or The Andromeda Stain.

You could argue that our fears are the inspiration for these type of productions but in turn these productions feed our fears and shape our (often) irrational responses. It's a fiction to reality feedback loop.

This is called the theater of crisis model, a cognitive pattern where people unconsciously model their behavior or expectations based on media they've consumed, especially emotionally charged, high-stakes scenarios. That's particularly clear when you think about some of the most performative responses to Covid: videos of “last hugs,” masked grocery runs filmed like action sequences, clapping for healthcare workers etc. We love that shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TowinKarz
Back