This is a great reality check via @MattHourihan

To hit a 2% of GDP target for US federal R&D spending (i.e., same as peak of space race) would require annual $ increases of:

30%-->2026
18%-->2030
13%-->2035
10%-->2040
US federal R&D $ has been more or less constant as a % of domestic discretionary spending for >40 years
Data @aaas @MattHourihan
Meaningful increases in R&D $ > increases in domestic disc $ would represent the most significant change in US R&D OVERALL budget policy in a half century

So key to watch is if federal spending increases dramatically overall, cause R&D ain't gonna eat someone else's lunch

/END

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Roger Pielke Jr.

Roger Pielke Jr. Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RogerPielkeJr

29 Mar
Biden OSTP to investigate Trump OSTP & federal agencies on matters of scientific integrity ...

"The goal will be to try to implement practices and policies that prevent anything that might be uncovered from happening again."
Improving scientific integrity policies and practices across federal agencies is a good idea

But it requires more than executive action, it will require legislation

See: rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/scientific-i…
A Biden OSTP investigation of Trump OSTP and agencies is fine, let's learn lessons ... but it should not come at the expense of pushing forward scientific integrity legislation such as led by @RepPaulTonko

Here is my 2019 testimony on that bill: science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/…
Read 4 tweets
24 Mar
🚨New Preprint posted🚨

Most plausible 2005-2040 emissions scenarios project less than 2.5°C of warming by 2100
osf.io/preprints/soca…
w/ @matthewgburgess @jritch

What do plausible IPCC scenarios project to 2100?
We answer this question
And the news is good

🧵 follows...
We have done a lot of work to identify implausible scenarios of the future
➡️iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…
➡️sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

In this new paper we turn that around and seek to identify plausible scenarios and analyze them as a subset of all scenarios
Plausibility as a criteria to evaluate scenarios comes from IPCC

We define plausibility as an acceptable growth rate error in CO2 emissions 2005-2020 & 2005-2040

We use 2 error filters with 1311 AR5 & SSP scenarios identifying the 5-10% & 20-40% most plausible scenarios ⬇️
Read 11 tweets
18 Mar
Short 🧵

You might remember late last year a study was published arguing that hurricanes were staying stronger, longer over land, looking at 1967-2018

Headlines followed ... Image
New study looks at a longer time period-1900-2019-finds over the period of record that storms are actually weakening faster (non-sig downward trend), even after removing outliers

"There is no significant linear trend throughout the whole 120-year period"

agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.10… Image
But fear not

By looking at 15 data points since 1980 an upwards trend can still be claimed

Where would hurricanes & climate change discussions be without analyses that start in 1980? Whew ;-) Image
Read 4 tweets
18 Mar
Tropical cyclones in Hong Kong region 1885-2017
"The reconstructed series of TCs from 1885 to 2017 indicated an apparent decreasing trend accompanied by obvious inter-annual to multi-decadal variability."
link.springer.com/article/10.100… Image
From the same paper, TC landfalls in China 1884-2016
"the number of TCs affecting southern China coastal zone and the TC-caused precipitation in China mainland has actually decreased over the last 5–6 decades" Image
From the same paper, TC landfalls in Japan 1900-2014
"both the trends of annual TCs in Japan and affecting HK during the past 110 years plus showed a similar decrease (−0.08 and −0.11 TC/10 years, respectively)" Image
Read 4 tweets
17 Mar
Reminder
I'm giving the Regius Lecture in Political Science one hour from now
Here is a short 🧵with some slides from my talk to whet your interest ...
My focus is on "following the science?" and will focus on COIVD-19, science advice and @EScAPE_Covid19
Among things I'll discuss is the lack of US preparation for the pandemic in the context of science advice, including data ... as this jaw-dropping revelation from @alexismadrigal @yayitsrob reveals
Read 5 tweets
16 Mar
Over a decade, the creators of the RCP scenarios warned against using RCP8.5 as a "reference" scenario for the other RCPs (figure left)

This advice was ignored, with at least 5,800 papers doing exactly that (figure right)

So too do various reports of the IPCC & USNCA
There is of course no problem using RCP8.5 in research

However, we should all be clear that it has no relation to the planet that we live on, Earth, past, present or future

I propose we rename RCP8.5 as Tatooine so that it is abundantly clear that it is a fictional world
In fact, it is not just RCP8.5 that is problematic

Key aspects of the real world (Earth) are rapidly departing from the imagined worlds of the RCP/SSP universe

Consider coal consumption, for instance
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


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

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/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!

Follow Us on Twitter!