• midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    ·
    26 days ago

    ‘Sharp acceleration’ meaning 75% faster warming in the last decade compared to the 40 years previous, and blowing past the 1.5° target in 3-4 years. No speculation was given, but I think it’s likely we’re seeing the limits of oceanic absorption of co2 and heat. The ocean’s latent heat capacity has flattened the curve for more than a century, and it’s very hard to predict when that will run out, but sea surface temperatures spiking all over have been good evidence that we have passed a major tipping point in the last few years.

    • dudeface@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      26 days ago

      They also banned sulphur oxide in ship fuel which would have had a cooling effect, that was hiding the full extent of the damage and is slowly dissipating

      Won’t be long until we start doing that again on purpose

        • Gonzako@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          26 days ago

          Actually it’s kinda good news as it shows we can make direct impact to the climate. Just with a substance actually made for it.

          • midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            26 days ago

            Don’t take it too seriously, there is an effect but it’s not that large. And anyways, the change in maritime fuel standards happened in 2020, while this trend goes back to 2015. A geoengineering project is just going to cause more problems, we don’t know nearly enough about how the world works, truly.

    • rf_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      26 days ago

      I’ve read that the models used to predict the rate of change were too optimistic or an assumption about them was too conservative and thus not very realistic. Now we have data showing the models under-predicted the rate of change, so one argument is that we were already on this path since decades ago, we just didn’t model it right.

      In any case, we’re all fucked so who gives a shit anyway no?

      Is there a name for when we know what the right thing to do is but we keep not doing it?

      • midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        26 days ago

        All of the climate models have adjustable parameters. We are still within the bounds of the worst case scenarios but scientists are always afraid to claim too much. An academic’s reputation is a lot less recoverable than a pop star or politician in the sense that they, and their colleagues, actually take their words and predictions seriously. I don’t want to completely dismiss the effect of lobbying and corruption toward the downplaying of global warming, but making smaller-than-necessary claims is a common sight in most academic fields.