I'm reading a book for an essay at the moment - Degrowth in the Suburbs by S. Alexander and B. Gleeson - and I'd just like to share a few choice excerpts...
^(I have a link to a complete version of this book, not sure if I'm allowed to share that here, message me if you want it.)
"Would you cross the road if you had a 50 or 66% chance of doing so safely? Would you do so if you had an 80% chance? A 95% chance? Probably not, and yet it seems the world is basing climate policy on far lower expectations of success. The IEA tends to assume a 50% chance of avoiding 2Β°C; the IPCC develops 1.5 and 2Β°C scenarios based on 50 and 66% chances of success, but no higher. This normalises a one-in-two or one-in-three chance of failure... For instance, if world leaders concluded on reviewing the evidence that an 80% chance of remaining below 1.5Β°C was the most justifiable climate goal, they would then discover that there is in fact no carbon budget left, just as there is no carbon budget if a 90% chance of avoiding 2Β°C is assumed... Rather than accept this implication, mainstream political and economic analyses essentially βself-censorβ their own work to avoid questioning the dominant paradigm of growth capitalism"
"It is also worth noting that there are some worrying ambiguities in the very language of a β1.5Β°C scenarioβ. If such a scenario assumes a 50% chance of success, what is typically missed is that this means a 33% of exceeding 2Β°C and a 10% chance of exceeding 3Β°C. So if there is 10% chance of exceeding 3Β°C and thereby most likely causing outright chaos, it doesnβt seem right to call this a 1.5Β°C scenario. But such is the politics of language, glossed over by most people, including many in the scientific community."
"But what might happen if a society or a city finds itself (by choice or by force of circumstances) with less energy to invest in economic growth and, at the same time, having to bear the complexification that growth brings and requires? Two broad pathways lie ahead: either, the society tries to maintain the existing, growth-orientated socio-economic form but solve fewer problems due to the declining energy budget (a phenomenon typically characterised as societal decay or collapse, depending on the speed of decline); or, the society rethinks the range and nature of the problems it is trying to solve, and
... keep reading on reddit β‘
https://preview.redd.it/bi3r2qo2bfx71.png?width=1110&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc48a554001ef6fa92efbb68ec141bdac65b59fe
For centuries, different countries have signed agreements to obtain help to achieve some common goal. With global temperature, it would be no different.
Almost 200 countries are united in the Paris Agreement with a common goal: to reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere. With global warming pointing to a 2Β°C rise in temperature, several countries are taking sustainable measures to change this reality before it's too late.
https://preview.redd.it/eit0z90ebfx71.png?width=1110&format=png&auto=webp&s=4a1be5fbbccb0c0e4a26d514bfd6c506c0a0cdf7
For centuries, different countries have signed agreements to obtain help to achieve some common goal. With global temperature, it would be no different.
Almost 200 countries are united in the Paris Agreement with a common goal: to reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere. With global warming pointing to a 2Β°C rise in temperature, several countries are taking sustainable measures to change this reality before it's too late.
