Climate change is real
Aggressive adaptation & mitigation policies make good sense (as I’ve argued for 25 yrs)

Being accurate w/ climate science is thus really important

If you actually read IPCC WG1 report you’ll find it less apocalyptic than you’ve been told (sorry!)

🧵⬇️
Two big issues

1. IPCC relies excessively on extreme scenarios it deems unlikely. This is the fault of the IPCC.

2. IPCC is accurate on global trends in weather extremes. In key cases, finding none - storms, floods, met & hydro drought. Activists/media fail to report this.
There’s a powerful current of millenarianism in the climate discourse

I get it

End of times narratives feed a powerful human need

But IPCC report isn’t a sacred text previewing the apocalypse, regardless what you’re being told

You are safe
We will be OK

Sorry if this offends
Achieving net zero CO2 is a huge challenge and it will take much of the 21st century to achieve it

It’s not gonna happen by 2030 or 2040 or even 2050 but the world is well positioned to make it happen

IPCC says under current policies present world is on track for 2.7C by 2100
Of course there’s uncertainties in temperature projections, it could be worse

At the same time “current policies” are always pessimistic because policies actually change

So hitting a stabilization target consistent with 2 deg C is going to take a lot of effort but it’s in reach
You don’t have to take my word for it

Take the word of the scenarios of the IPCC most consistent with the century so far and current policies to 2040: osf.io/preprints/soca…

These say we are on track for 2.2 deg C by 2100
Of course coming climate changes, variability & surprises mean that we must up our game on adaptation

The good news is that society has never been less vulnerable to climate extremes

We are in 2021 in an enviable position to continue that trend even in the face of uncertainties
More good news on extreme events

The gap has never been larger between the evidence and media reports, advocacy messaging & political fear tactics

There have not been increases on climate time scales in storms, floods, m&h droughts

Don’t believe, me - that’s IPCC!
There have been increase in heat waves, some measures of extreme precipitation (not = floods) & A&S drought - again from IPCC

So yes change is real but at the same time not everything that happens is caused by or made worse by climate change

It’s OK, we can say it!
Last comment
There are incredible pressures & consequences for expressing the views that I just have, even though they’re firmly grounded in evidence & IPCC

The culture of climate discourse is incredibly unhealthy - that needs fixing

But I have tenure & optimism, a nice combo🙏

• • •

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

9 Aug
IPCC AR6 WG1 🧵
Some initial comments
Think of these as working notes
Comments welcomed
Let's go . . .
Let's start with scenarios

This is rather huge
"In general, no likelihood is attached to the scenarios assessed in this Report"

So that means that users of the scenarios have to independently assess likelihoods Image
That said: "the likelihood of high emission scenarios such as RCP8.5 or SSP5-8.5 is considered low"

They also said that an appropriate scenario for "absence of additional climate policies" (aka BAU) is "RCP4.5, RCP6.0 and SSP2-4.5 scenarios:

They said it, kudos to IPCC WG1🔥🔥 Image
Read 36 tweets
8 Aug
🧵Some things to watch for in tomorrow's IPCC report:
➡️Are 7.0/8.5 used as ref scenarios?
➡️Has central est of climate sensitivity gone up/down vs AR5?
➡️Does report venture into policy (eg, carbon budgets, Paris Agreement, etc)?
➡️Does D&A framework get tossed in favor of EA?
Importantly

AR6 WG1 will necessarily be less "alarmist" than AR5 (which wasn't that alarmist) simply bc RCP8.5 was centered in AR5 and we now know extreme scenarios (7.0/8.5) are implausible

Expect lots of excuses from IPCC observers for again focusing on extreme scenarios
I fully expect a lot of euphemisms to be used tomorrow for "reference scenario"

Like:
➡️high emissions scenario
➡️very high emissions scenario
➡️worst case scenario
➡️continued increasing emissions

Changing semantics won't change the underlying issues w/ implausible scenarios
Read 12 tweets
7 Aug
🧵Some might be curious why the IPCC focuses on the scenarios that it does

After all these scenarios are the foundation of the entire report's look to the future & assessment of possible impacts and the worth of different policy approaches . . .
The short answer is that the highest priority scenarios were selected for scientific purposes first & considerations of plausibility absent

Here is how the CMIP6 exercise justified its baseline (BAU/reference) scenarios

➡️science & unmitigated baseline

gmd.copernicus.org/articles/9/346…
Decisions on what scenarios to prioritize were made in 2015/16 but build on earlier decisions of CMIP5, IPCC 2007 & SRES 2000 and even earlier

The IPCC AR6 report in 2021 is really an assessment based on scenarios that were determined to be most relevant as much as 20 years ago
Read 8 tweets
7 Aug
Some pre-reading in advance of IPCC AR6 WG1 on Monday

How Climate Scenarios Lost Touch With Reality issues.org/climate-change…
I'll be interested of course in how the IPCC WG1 treats scenarios but also, those reporters on the climate beat who are very well aware of these issues

Implausible scenarios of scary, alarming, extreme futures are often too enticing not to report on as predictions/projections
As I explained in The Climate Fix a decade ago, the core messages of the IPCC have remained largely unchanged since 1990, and I expect those messages to be reaffirmed by AR6 ... probably with better graphics and images
Those looking for radically new messages will be disappointed
Read 5 tweets
7 Aug
What scenario will feature most in IPCC AR6 SPM?
This is a bit of an loaded question, since CMIP6 prioritized 7.0/8.5 scenarios (baseline aka BAU aka reference) so we should expect these to serve as reference scenarios (euphemisms: "high emissions," "4 deg C" or "emissions continuing to increase") in AR6
We shall see . . .
Does anyone know if full AR6 is released Monday or just SPM? I'd hope the whole thing
Read 4 tweets
6 Aug
The IPCC is important & if it didn't exist we'd have to create it

Assessments of existing literature are useful
There should not be any new science in the assessment that isn't in the literature already

But I get the excitement of an embargo & prospects for textual exegesis🔥
There has always been a tension in the IPCC (and more generally in advisory processes) between

A. enabling or empowering decision makers to make decisions

VS

B. compeling decision makers to make particular decisions favored by assessors

See below⬇️

The IPCC has tried unsuccessfully to skirt the advocacy vs assess issue by invoking a phrase "neutral, policy relevant but not policy prescriptive"

This claim has been studied, critiqued and discussed in depth - such as, jstor.org/stable/44732800
Read 8 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!

:(