This paper is used in Extinction Rebellion talks to illustrate the danger of low probability, high impact risks inherent in continued business as usual.
As I understand it, the authors considered several emissions scenarios and estimated about a 1 in 20 chance of their baseline scenario producing greater than 3C of warming by 2050.
I'd like to invite any commentary on this paper and my interpretation, especially by those with formal education in climate science. Is this paper well received or controversial? Any criticism or nuance in understanding it that I should be aware of? Is this baseline scenario a realistic description of business as usual? What are the potential impacts of 3C of warming by 2050, and would you agree with the catergorization of them as "catastrophic"?
Thanks in advance!
Basically the title. Climate change is a major issue that we must solve.
Climate spending proposals, such as BBB, often have social policy attached.
For example, you get a tax credit for a union made EV.
If climate change is so important, then why attach the union part? It just hinders the policy becoming law.
Little did we know it was now warm enough for them to awaken from their aeons of hibernation.
We all love the experience of international mixing and travelling and dancing around the world. Many tangueros living a nomadic lifestyle, can even spend time dancing in Buenos Aires and in Europe to catch the big festivals.
But the world may be changing soon.
This week the Kiwi Lindy Exchange announced it decided to stop organising future events.
| ... We wish we could continue to run this amazing event ... but attendees jetting in from all over the planet are no longer viable if we want to ensure a liveable planet for future generations.
| ... to limit global heating to below 2 degrees (Paris Climate Agreement 2015) each of us needs to be producing no more than ~2000kg CO2 per year by 2030. Flying from Perth to Auckland emits 946kg of CO2 (one way) per person.
In other words, each attendee flying from Australia to New Zealand and back has nearly exceeded his annual allowance with one event.
This organiser has taken a painful decision. And they won't be the last.
Given the type of freaky weather that has been experienced around the world recently, we may be near the climate change inflexion point.
Festivals that depend heavily on international participation may become ecologically untenable. Dancers may have to budget their carbon footprint responsibly.
