It's been a TERRIBLE year for ecological-climate action:
🔺we can expect a massive rebound in emissions and continued habitat destruction
🔺for 1.5C we need 0 emissions in the 2020s (even that may not be enough)
🔺1.5-2C may not give a stable climate according to new research
🔺we can expect a massive rebound in emissions and continued habitat destruction
🔺for 1.5C we need 0 emissions in the 2020s (even that may not be enough)
🔺1.5-2C may not give a stable climate according to new research
https://twitter.com/dwallacewells/status/1351522802080358401
1. We have no crystal balls so 2021 could be a turning point, of course. But it would take something absolutely extraordinary to suddenly stop the destruction that's happening in this particularly awful stage of industrial capitalism.
https://twitter.com/ClimateBen/status/1344241320840355840?s=20
2. Using a 1750 baseline, 1.5C probably isn't possible anymore. Using a 19th/20th century baseline still only gives us until 2030 to slash emissions to zero for a '67 percent' chance of not exceeding 1.5C.
theconversation.com/new-research-s…
theconversation.com/new-research-s…
3. 'findings challenge the possibility of limiting warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius.
“In fact, it calls into question the assumption that the climate would even be stable at those levels of warming if all human greenhouse gas emissions were to cease"insideclimatenews.org/news/13012021/…
“In fact, it calls into question the assumption that the climate would even be stable at those levels of warming if all human greenhouse gas emissions were to cease"insideclimatenews.org/news/13012021/…
4. And what assumptions do we need to think that a 'two-degree target, by contrast, yields a much longer timeline, requiring the world to achieve net-zero by 2070 or 2080 — without even the help of negative emissions'?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
