“New Zealand remains one of the highest per capita emitters in its region, as Climate Change Minister James Shaw noted in his response. “The world has used more than four fifths of the total carbon budget for a 50/50 chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C.” Five takeaways from the IPCC’s report on limiting dangerous global heating That means that the likelihood of limiting warming to 1.5C has declined on average compared to scenarios previously identified by the IPCC.
“Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise in the last decade, albeit at a slower rate than the previous one. “”I think the report tells us that we’ve reached the now-or-never point of limiting warming to 1.5C,” said IPCC lead author Heleen De Coninck, who’s Professor of Socio-Technical Innovation and Climate Change at Eindhoven University of Technology.” Climate change: IPCC scientists say it’s ‘now or never’ to limit warming Without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors, it will be impossible.” ‘Now or never, if we want to limit global warming to 1.5C’ “Jim Skea, a professor at Imperial College London and co-chair of the working group behind the report, said: “It’s now or never, if we want to limit global warming to 1.5C.
“Analysis: What is the real cost of a switch to biofuels?” When the head of these NGO’s spout this shit they aren’t mistaken, they are lying.
100 rogues composer full#
Anyone with an internet connection and a hand full of brain cells knows that when using 1750 as a baseline we are well passed 1.5C and probably 2C. In this cluster fuck of lies the head of Oxfam NZ says we have only 10 years to reduce emissions to meet the 1.5C rubicon. Scientific Mal-Practice from the Mann HimselfĪnother perfect example of why we are completely and utterly fucked. If we do that, we can avoid a catastrophic 2C (~3.5 F) warming of the planet.”Ĭomplete and utter bullshit unsupported by any real science. The price on carbon needs to be set such that it leads to a reduction in carbon emissions of several percent a year for the next few decades. “Whether this takes the form of a carbon tax (a revenue-neutral carbon tax? fee and dividend? cap-and-trade?), I leave that to the policymakers to determine as long as they accept, as the premise for policy, what the science has to say about the reality and threat of climate change. “I would place a price on carbon,” Michael E Mann, a Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State, told Salon by email. Well, an analysis by Sam Carana shows that it was already more than 1.5☌ above pre-industrial when the Paris Agreement was reached.” “Remember the Paris Agreement? In 2015, politicians pledged to hold the global temperature rise to well below 2☌ above pre-industrial levels and pledged they would try and limit the temperature rise to 1.5☌ above pre-industrial levels.
“It’s time to stop denying how precarious the situation is.” We’ll start with the truth and then get to the lies Sam Carana at the Arctic News Blogspot is one of the few prepared to address the science and be realistic about the severity of our predicament. I covered this issue previously Baseline Temperature dishonesty at the Edge of Extinction I have curated a number of articles below showing the orchestrated litany of lies from people pretending to cover the climate and extinction crises.Īs always the technique is to shift the baseline dates so that they can pretend that we’ve had much less anthropogenic warming than we’ve in reality triggered.
0 kommentar(er)
