Only two years left of world’s carbon budget to meet 1.5C target, scientists warn
Breaching threshold would ramp up catastrophic weather events, further increasing human suffering
Might as well enjoy it then. Get those deckchairs set properly and what shall we ask the band to play?
Can someone point me to these catastrophic weather events definitively caused by climate change?
No, not something that has been statistically bent to the narrative (cough, attribution science) but actual evidence?
I’ve just seen the weather forcast for the south east. I’m doomed!
“Scientists warn”. So it must be true then.
“The remaining carbon budgets are declining rapidly and the main reason is the world’s failure to curb global CO2 emissions,” said Prof Joeri Rogelj, at Imperial College London, UK. “Under any course of action now, there is a very high chance we will reach and even exceed 1.5C and even higher levels of warming.”
Save me, Science!
The 1.5 limit was hit last year. Unless i’m much mistaken we, and the planet, are still here and haven’t disappeared in a cloud of blue steam as predicted.
According to the ‘experts’ (IPCC), of the 33 key indicators they predict will happen (increase in floods, drought, tornadoes, etc. etc.) due to man made global warming, they only have ‘High’ confidence that 4 have occurred as of Assessment report 6, none of them being floods, droughts, tornado’s etc, etc.
There is no evidence of any change for 24 of the key indicators……..
No, not something that has been statistically bent to the narrative (cough, attribution science) but actual evidence?
You mean like a hockey stick or a 97% consensus among scientists?
It really is difficult to imagine how more obviously they could state that these “climate models” are absolute bollocks than to actually say so.
Great. So in 5 years we can see if you’re right or not.
My issue with climate change is that the optimal place in France for growing Pinot Noir hasn’t changed in a century. Wine production is about having the right mix of warmth and rain. Not enough warmth, it doesn’t ripen, not enough rain, it can’t grow. Broadly, wine grows from about Champagne down to Sicily.
And there’s a sweet spot where it’s perfect. Loads of sun for ripening, and enough rain to grow. Which is roughly the 40 miles from Fixin to Chassagne-Montrachet. If you go 50 miles north or south, the wines are still drinkable, but they aren’t great. And this has been the same 40 miles for hundreds of years. If global warming is happening, why isn’t this changing? Why isn’t the bit further north taking over as it’s more optimal? That Langres is now more like Vosne-Romanee was. And this is the same with all wine growing areas. The best wines from Aquitaine still come from the same bits that they did when we owned it.
Now people will say “global warming is boosting British wine” but that is bollocks. What is boosting British Wine is people doing it as a hobby and a tourist attraction. Most vineyards make more money from visits, people having lunch, buying a bottle as a souvenir. Not the selling of wine. Nyetimber had a ton of money poured into it, but it has never made a profit, Because whether it’s getting better or not, you still have to be mad to produce wine in England rather than Chile or Romania, which have lower land and labour costs and more reliable climate. The British climate can sometimes suit producing wine, but there are years where nearly the whole crop is wiped out.
More broadly, I don’t see greed pig capitalists responding to climate change. People are still building beach front villas in the Caribbean. If the tides are going to rise, that’s their investment fucked. Why have Tuvalu built a new airport building at their airport which is only 3m above sea level, if the runway is going to submerged in no time?
As always, I have a beef with the headline – “scientists warn”. Not “some scientists warn” or “a scientist at XYZ think tank”, apparently, it’s all scientists. While the headline doesn’t include the word “all” it implies that. If an article were headlined “Scientists Warn That Catastrophic Climate Change is a Hoax” I suspect the left/green crowd would notice this.
You know, a few months ago I was wondering whether I was wrong about climate change and should finally buy an airconditioner.
But now it’s winter and bloody cold, I’m thinking maybe I should consider a heater???
One of the stupider aspects of this whole debate is that we want it to be warmer than 200 years ago.
Aesthetically, it is a shame that we don’t have snowy winters but by every objective metric it is a Good Thing.
So in 5 years we can see if you’re right or not.
I think we can guess, based on the climate industry’s 100% record of predictive failure.
“Under any course of action now, there is a very high chance we will reach and even exceed 1.5C and even higher levels of warming.”
Grand. Let’s ditch all the net zero bollocks and get some nice cheap coal-fired leccy going.
We had 100 months to save the world in 2008 according to Andrew Simms.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/series/100-months-to-save-the-world
It got him a lucrative column in the Guardian, although this ended when the sky didn’t fall in in 2016.
The Jehovahs Witnesses predicted the end of times would be in 1914, 1925, 1975 and hinted about imminent Armageddon around 1999 without setting a specific date. At least they have slowly learnt from their mistakes.
What the actual is a carbon budget and why is there a special 1.5C of too much of it carbon fiscal rule.
The climate change committee are utterly ignorant (and neoliberal). You just allow as much CO2 as you need and government grants the licences to make it so they can, and then when warming shows up you tax it back. Candidly it’s simple.
@Boganboy
Get an inverter heat pump – works both ways as coolong in summer and warming in winter.
@WB
I was drinking a very palatable Siegerrebe last week, grown in Abergavenny – there’s posh for you! There are plenty of vineyards in Oregon/Washington/BC, where the climate is at least as poor as Kent, but I don’t know how profitable they are.
There is a theory that the Fall of the Roman Empire was not, as Gibbon claimed, because Christianity made everyone soft, but because the end of the “Roman warm period” significantly reduced the ability of Italy, Gaul and Iberia to sustain their populations and a standing army as well.
If the temperature in 100 BC to 250AD created a feedback loop resulting a permanent increase in temperature and climate disaster leading to the end of civilisation as we know it, my history teacher must have got it wrong and we must all have fried
Chris Miller,
“I was drinking a very palatable Siegerrebe last week, grown in Abergavenny – there’s posh for you! There are plenty of vineyards in Oregon/Washington/BC, where the climate is at least as poor as Kent, but I don’t know how profitable they are.”
The climate in Dayton, Oregon, which is where Domaine Serene make their pinot noir has a similar climate to the Northern Rhone. Slightly warmer than Beaune. Chateau Ste. Michelle comes from Woodinville, Washington, which has a climate that is about one degree cooler than Beaune in Summer, similar to say, Sancerre.
And £25 for a dry white (if it’s what I’m thinking of). Well, yeah, should be good at that price. You can buy Cloudy Bay, Cru Chablis for £25. That’s about as good as it gets, other than silly bollocks. But this is always my problem when I try English sparkling whites at tastings. It’s comparable with Champagne but Champagne is the worst value sparkling wine around.