Skip to main content

The disagreement between two climate scientists that will decide our future

 


Getting to net zero emissions by mid-century is conventionally understood as humanity’s best hope for keeping Earth’s surface temperature (already 1.2°C above its pre-industrial level) from increasing well beyond 1.5°C – potentially reaching a point at which it could cause widespread societal breakdown.

At least one prominent climate scientist, however, disagrees.

James Hansen of Columbia University in the US published a paper with colleagues in November which claims temperatures are set to rise further and faster than the predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In his view, the 1.5°C target is dead.

He also claims net zero is no longer sufficient to prevent warming of more than 2°C. To regain some control over Earth’s rising temperature, Hansen supports accelerating the retirement of fossil fuels, greater cooperation between major polluters that accommodates the needs of the developing world and, controversially, intervening in Earth’s “radiation balance” (the difference between incoming and outgoing light and heat) to cool the planet’s surface.

Read more here!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Viking Geo

 Video's more your thing? The Viking Geo has a wide array of fantastic videos to support your learning, browse through the channels playlists to find the units that fit our course.  The channel can be found  here.

Power and borders

 The UK’s island identity has long shaped its political outlook – is that why it currently feels so adrift? The article below explores the identity of the UK with a particular focus on politics and the links this creates with sovereignty.  The link to the article can be found here:  https://theconversation.com/the-uks-island-identity-has-long-shaped-its-political-outlook-is-that-why-it-currently-feels-so-adrift-209276

Cancer in the UK. 10-Year Cancer Plan: call for evidence

Foreword from the Secretary of State This country’s fight against COVID-19 has shown just what we can do when we join forces against a common threat. During the pandemic we used this country’s ingenuity and endeavour to put the virus on the back foot, but now is the time to apply this same spirit and determination to another threat: cancer. It is time to declare a national war on cancer, which is the biggest cause of death from disease in this country. It is a menace that has taken far too many people before their time and caused grief and suffering on a massive scale. As a country, we have made great progress in recent years; in just the last 15 years, one-year survival has increased by more than 10 percentage points, a remarkable achievement. But despite this progress, I am determined that we will go much further. This is essential if we are to complete the job of recovering cancer services following the pandemic and use the impressive advances in diagnosis and treatments to radicall...