Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #ipcc

Most recents (24)

For weeks and months, i have been tracking the arctic temperatures and the decline of the icecap.
Wondering why it was so warm , and for so long.
What is happening there? Icecap is down over 50%.
Albedo effect will be massively impacted by this.
#climatechange #gretathunberg
We learned a few days ago, that scientific expedition in the east siberian arctic just found methane fountains bubbling on the sea surface , in the middle of the east siberian sea.
Some of the implications :

#ClimateCrisis #climatestrike #ClimateAction…
Here is the theory:
1/ Increasing periods of open water implies an increasing number of storm events.. Such events have the potential to rapidly ventilate bubble-transported and dissolved CH4 from the water column, producing high emission rates to the atmosphere
Read 13 tweets
A dark tweet, sorry about this.
We learned yesterday that scientific expedition in the east siberian arctic just found methane fountains bubbling on the sea surface .
#ClimateCrisis #climatestrike #ClimateAction #climatechange #gretathunberg…
Please watch the video and focus on what the russian scientist declares (13.20-14-20)
Dr Natalia Shakhova
#ClimateCrisis #climatestrike #ClimateAction #climatechange #gretathunberg #methane

Natalia Shakhova doesn't agree with the #ipcc, which doesn't take the ESAS risk into account for calculating the various #RCP ..or any feedback loops including #CH4

You can read more here…
Read 7 tweets
Thread: Blatant #ClimateDenial has lost. The new conflict is whether #ClimateChange is a crisis requiring urgent social and #economic transformation, or something we can adapt to incrementally while carrying on with business as usual. 1/40
2/ A recent opinion piece by Bjorn Lomborg in the @globeandmail is representative of the 'business as usual argument'. Let's deconstruct it to see how this gets passed off as the pragmatic point of view, and why it's false.…
3/ The basic tactic is this: provide a few common-sense truths to gain the air of pragmatism and then feed us the story we're desperate to hear: that everything will be fine, that growth will outpace #ClimateDamages and life can carry on as usual.
Read 41 tweets
India has pledge to reduce its emission intensity (CO₂/GDP) 33-35% from 2005 levels by 2030, leading to a big rise in CO₂ emissions by 2030.

In context, 1.5°C requires a 45% reduction in CO₂ emissions from 2010 levels by 2030, globally!…
Yes, India has much lower per capita CO₂ emissions than many countries & is below the world average. But, if 1.5°C or 2°C is the goal, then even countries with low per capita emissions have to reduce emissions...

Yes, US, EU, etc have to do more, so does India, China, etc

Despite impressive growth in solar & wind in India, see lines at the bottom of figure, the Indian energy system is dominated by coal, oil, & biomass.

Coal is still growing strongly in India, despite claims that Indian coal has come to an end.

Read 4 tweets
1. The #IPCC has released another Special Report, this time on the Ocean & Cryosphere in a Changing Climate #SROCC.

Oceans (top) & mountain & polar regions (bottom) all have pretty severe impacts.

About the only benefit is for Arctic shipping & kelp!
2. The report's headlines focus on RCP8.5 (red) versus RCP2.6 (blue), "reflecting the available literature".

Reality will lie somewhere in between these two extremes, but important to highlight that changes relative to the recent situation (1986-2005) are already extreme...
3. "RCP8.5 is a high GHG emission scenario in the absence of [climate] policies... Compared to the total set of RCPs, RCP8.5 corresponds to the pathway with the highest GHG emissions."

True, but RCP8.5 is an extreme baseline & many think implausible...…
Read 8 tweets
#BREAKING Climate: Tropical cyclones becoming more powerful, destructive: UN report
#BREAKING Many coastal megacities to be hit annually by extreme weather by 2050: UN report
#BREAKING Building dikes and levees to hold back rising seas could cost hundreds of billions of dollars a year: UN report
Read 6 tweets
India has pledged to reduce its emission intensity by 33-35% from 2005 levels by 2030. Given the growth in GDP, this means emissions will rise ~5% per year to 2030.

According to #IPCC #SR15, global CO₂ needs to go down 45% from 2010 levels by 2030.

According to the Climate Action Tracker @climateactiontr India's pledge is compatible with 2°C. This is because India has low per capita and historical responsibility.

But, the less India does, the more other countries have to do (CO₂ is cumulative)…

The US, who has a completely inadequate pledge, would be compatible with 2°C if emissions were cut >50% by 2020-2030.

For India to be compatible with 2°C, the US has to do the impossible!

Read 4 tweets
El #CO2 representa un 0.52% sobre el total de todos los gases que confinguran las distintas capas de la atmósfera terrestre. Las emisiones de orígen antropológico representan una parte muy pequeña respecto del total.
En EE UU (donde la medición de la temperatura terrestre es más precisa), las variaciones de temperatura en los últimos años son menores y sin tendencia clara (más bien, algo a la baja).
Dos de los gráficos del informe del #IPCC (de 2007, luego se eliminaron de sucesivos informes) son los que muestran una evolución largo plazo: la Tierra ha estado mucho más caliente (y más fría) que el nivel de temperatura actual.
Read 16 tweets
The sun has always been the best antidepressant. It is especially potent against (un)consciously (agitated-depressive) science-denying sun-, cosmic rays-, clouds- & ocean- (low-pass filter of the climate system because of their heat content) deniers in #IPCC.
An insight into the agitated-depressive world of a physicist seeing CO2 as "inevitable byproduct of combustion" and not as the source of life
While (agitated-depressive) science-denying sun-, cosmic rays-, clouds- and ocean-deniers such as these Swiss #IPCC-"scientists" are still predicting the end of all glaciers in Switzerland by 2100...
Read 15 tweets
Too busy, or need poetry? Here’s the #IPCC’s Special Report on Climate Change and Land #SRCCL summarised in 29 #haiku #sciku. (Disclaimer: personal choices here, not representing the same balance as the full report. Apologies for misappropriating this ancient art form…) [1/29]
SPM Section A1.1 [2/29]
SPM Section A1.3 [3/29]
Read 30 tweets
The #IPCC special report on the land sector is out.

It's the culmination of the hard work of 107 experts from 52 countries.

I've got some big takeaways. Buckle in – it's going to be a long thread.

Some quick background:

Land and ocean warm at different rates (thank you @RARohde) for the great figure.
Land is both a carbon source and sink. The balance between the strength of sources and sinks determines overall impact of land on GHG emissions. Humans already use a LOT of land (almost ¾ of all ice-free terrestrial surface, according to the IPCC graphic below).
Read 24 tweets
This has not changed from earlier #IPCC assessments (like #AR5 or #SR15), but, not surprisingly, trade-offs with other forms of land-use are better highlighted in #SRCCL
All mitigation pathway archetypes for 1.5-2 °C (RCP1.9/2.6) include large volumes of carbon dioxide removal, even the very optimistic Pathway 6 that excludes engineered CDR (represented by BECCS) but relies on a large land sink… (ch 2.6.2) #SRCCL
Cumulative CDR volumes by 2100 for these 6 archetype mitigation pathways are quite high
P1: 395 Gt BECCS + 73 Gt Afforestation
P2: 466 Gt BECCS + 117 Gt AF
P3: 944 Gt BECCS only
P4: 300 Gt BECCS + 428 Gt AF
P5: 252 Gt BECCS + 128 Gt AF
P6: 124 Gt AF only
Read 5 tweets
Takeaways from the #IPCC Special Report on #ClimateChange & Land (#SRCCL). A thread.

1) We use a lot of land (much unsustainably)

Humans directly affect ~72% of "global ice-free land surface" & all is impacted by climate change (e.g. through warming & more intense extremes

2) A two-way interaction

Our use of land drives #ClimateChange ("agriculture, forestry and other land use" are ~23% of global man-made GHG emissions) & climate change adds stresses so worsens existing risks (e.g. biodiversity & degradation from extremes events)

3) As well as being an emission source, land is a sink

Photosynthesis draws down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and fixes it in plants (and soils). Overall the land is a net sink of ~29% of total human-induced CO2 emissions.

Read 9 tweets

The next #IPCC Special Report is out, this time on climate change & land (#SRCCL).

There is plenty to digest over the coming days, weeks, months, years, but a few initial reactions from the SPM...

Just to set the scene, no pressure: "Land provides the principal basis for human livelihoods and well-being including the supply of food, freshwater and multiple other ecosystem services, as well as biodiversity." Land is already heavily impacted...
Agriculture, Forestry, & Other Land Uses (AFOLU) are a quarter of global GHG emissions (GWP100).

The natural response of land to human-induced environmental change has been to cause a sink of ~11.2GtCO₂/yr, 29% of global CO₂. This may not last with climate change.

Read 12 tweets
Has a 10-fold increase in trade increased energy & material demand?

If we did not trade, it is quite possible that environmental impacts would be worse. No trade may lead to inefficient domestic resource extraction (food) & greatly limit technology.

If we did not trade, we would not have rapid price declines in solar or the emergence of electric vehicles. We would probably drive inefficient fuel guzzling 1970 style cars. We would probably have much more inefficient food production, causing biodiversity loss. 2/
That is not to say trade has no impact, but trade is probably an important part of the "solution" particularly related to technological transfer & development. North Korea has very limited trade, & that probably serves as a good (extreme) example of the alternative. 3/
Read 5 tweets
In het boek 'Waarom de wereld niet naar de knoppen gaat' schrijft Maarten Boudry @mboudry ook over de klimaatproblematiek. Hij wijst terecht op enkele valkuilen van het ecologisch denken. Maar sommige van z'n kernideeën zijn zwak onderbouwd of zelfs simpelweg fout. Een draadje.
Boudry is op z'n sterkst als hij enkele valkuilen van het ecologisch denken op de korrel neemt zoals doemdenken en misantropie, harmonie toedichten aan de natuur, relatieve risico's van bepaalde technologie (zoals kernenergie of GGO's) verabsoluteren, enz.
Ook z'n oproep om geconfronteerd met de klimaatproblematiek als 'verstandige en volwassen goden' het hoofd koel te houden en de handen uit de mouwen te steken, is terecht.
Read 19 tweets
NEW: We found that all of the $4.9 trillion the oil and gas industry is set to spend on production from new fields is incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C - the ambition of the Paris agreement.

Here's a 📈thread ⬇️
We mapped how forecast oil production from existing and new fields compares to the 1.5C pathways, using the @IPCC_CH 1.5C scenarios and data from @RystadEnergy.

As you can see, oil production from existing fields exceeds the 1.5°C pathway - so new oil ≠ compatible. 1/7
And it's the same story for gas - production from existing fields exceeds the 1.5°C pathway until 2032.

So new gas isn't compatible with 1.5°C, at least for the next decade.

Which is a blow for the oil industry's claims that gas is the answer to climate change. 2/7
Read 8 tweets
Next Wednesday @CityofVancouver staff report back to #Council on ramping up our #ClimateAction, in line with the #IPCC science and in response to the #ClimateEmergency. Here’s my breakdown of the recommendations 👇
This #ClimateEmergency report outlines 6 Big Moves for Council to direct staff to pursue & come back w. comprehensive/costed plans. Plus 53 Accelerated Actions to move on now. The targets are strong & won’t be easy. This is what governing in line with the science looks like.
Big Move 1: By 2030, 90% of people will live within an easy walk/roll of their daily needs (we’re at 45%). Focused on land-use & complete n'hoods, it would ⬇️ 153,000 tonnes carbon/year, while creating ⬆️ housing choices, ⬆️ social interaction, and supporting local businesses.
Read 17 tweets
THREAD on IEA, IPCC, & 1.5°C scenarios

The @IEA is getting pressure to do a 1.5°C scenario. We have an #IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C #SR15, so why not do a comparison...

As it happens, some IEA scenarios fall in the envelope of 1.5°C scenarios...

What are the IEA scenarios?
* Energy Technology Perspectives 2°C scenario (2DS, not in #SR15 database)
* ETP Beyond 2°C Scenario (B2DS, in database)
* IEA Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS, not in database)
* IEA Faster Transition Scenarios (SDS to net-zero, in database)
The CO₂ emissions from energy & industry (not LUC) for the two IEA scenarios are rather similar to the 1.5°C with no or low overshoot
* IEA B2DS is roughly consistent with 1.75°C warming in 2100 (though, #SR15 does not assess this)
* IEA Faster Transition is assessed as 2°C
Read 15 tweets
President Trump upended decades of U.S. policy that started with Richard Nixon when he declared that the goal of the U.S. was no longer “energy independence” but rather “American energy dominance.” This wasn’t Trumpian hyperbole.…
/2 Few policies have been pursued by the administration with more cohesiveness, zeal, and success — or with more potential to yield great and lasting harm. Trump has unleashed a massive, untethered expansion of oil, natural gas and coal production.
/3 Trump's "American Energy Dominance" policy seeks to make the U.S. the world’s foremost fossil fuel powerhouse. Its origins are in the radical writings of 2 Trump campaign advisers who call fossil fuels "The Master Resource,"as I wrote in @RollingStone…
Read 12 tweets
Does model bias effect outcomes of the #IPCC 1.5°C emission scenarios #SR15?

The scenario database is over represented by some model frameworks. Taking statistics will over represent some models (eg, REMIND, AIM), discount others (eg @IEA), & not all models included!

The bias varies by scenario category, here for 1.5°C scenarios with "no or low overshoot" as highlighted in #SR15. Should REMIND & POLES get more weight then GCAM or MERGE?
I often take medians of scenarios to simplify communication, trying to reveal the "key characteristics" of 1.5°C (trying to find robust messages). The scenario community does not like this approach
Read 8 tweets
THREAD (illustrative scenarios):

The #IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C #SR15 highlighted 4 illustrative scenarios. They vary widely in
* Socioeconomic assumptions (SSP1, SSP2, SSP5)
* Total (primary) energy use
* Biomass
* Solar
* Nuclear
* Oil
This is how the illustrative scenarios are presented in the #SR15 SPM. The energy system is shown by the table, the figures seem to give the key characteristics. It seems the selection was based on the use of biomass. 2/
P1 (LED) & P2 (S1) have the lowest use of biomass across scenarios, P4 (S5) has the highest use of biomass. They are outliers, which was perhaps the point of the selection? Because they are outliers, they potentially give a skewed perception of how most models get to 1.5°C! 3/
Read 10 tweets
Today I have been following the reports and articles about the @IPCC_CH report.
I am astonished that we are still talking about the 1,5 degree target as a reachable goal, without mentioning the ENORMOUS requirements that would take. -->
We already have at least 1,5 degrees (pollution hides at least 0,5 degrees ) built up in the system. In the future, we might find a way to limit the warming by 1,5 degrees, and that is almost necessary, with solutions that doesn't exist today.But that can't be our priority now.->
We have less than two years left now to bend the emission curve, and we had this chance to try to inform people about the crisis we are in, but instead we take that opportunity to spread false hope.
IPCC plays huge gamble with our future.
#climatecrisis #klimatkris #ipcc
Read 6 tweets
The #IPCC #SR15 report says very little about solar #geoengineering, which is the main, but not only subject, of my book #ThePlanetRemade beyond saying that there is high agreement that a particular form of it could keep temperatures below 1.5C (Cross chapter box 10 in Chapter 4)
If the IPCC not going into this more seems an odd omission, given the topic, I think it is because a) the scientific understanding on solar #geoengineering, which obviously will never be complete, is still pretty sketchy in many respects (though not as sketchy as some may think)
b) the structure that the IPCC chose for the report (which was forced on it in part by the UNFCCC's mandate to it) did not allow it o assess solar #geoengineering's potential contribution in any of its scenarios
Read 7 tweets

Related hashtags

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!