IPCC report

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
User avatar
Posts: 1624
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:34 am
Location: Hong Kong

IPCC report

Post by Seppia »

A new document from the IPCC is out.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assess ... g-group-i/
I have read the Summary For Policymakers (which I assume is a dumbed down version), and found it interesting.
Also, wanted to check here if there's someone more skilled than me who can/wants to comment further...

Posts: 760
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:12 pm
Location: Netherlands/Austria

Re: IPCC report

Post by J_ »

I am not more skilled than you Seppia.
I want to discuss how I react about climate change. For me the environment crisis is not only climate change. It is also how mankind now post-extreme-covid retakes their habits. Which habits has lead not only to this climate change but also to a general low number of people of having a healthy body. I have studied since the reports of the club of Rome and later writers and reports. Of which many are discussed here on the forum, often further enlightened by Jacob.

I cannot change what is.
I can think, act, study how to keep mental fit and avoid being mentally down by all these bad signs.
Which for sure will go on and on and will mean sadness and disaster for many humans.
So I have accepted this reality, and I do not worry because it is of no help.

I have studied a lot about health, about food, about rest and sleep, about moving. And in the course 20 years now I have adapted my way of life to maintain a healthy and fit body. The best first preparation against mischief.

I have researched the possibility how the two places where I live can get caught by a rising sea level, by storms, by wild fire, by draught or torrential rain, by cold or heat. By mud floods or snow avalances. And found out that there is always some change of misfortune. But to a reasonable measure I am prepared. The two places where I live are not the worst places related to the effects of the already appearing climate change.

I have some stock of food, of water, of making and storing electricity by solar and batteries. I have some spare of fuel to cook, I have a good waterfilter.
I have means of travel in case I have to leave one living place directly. I have isolated my homes against heat and cold.

The only thing I can do is be frugal with energy and water. Be frugal with stuff, be careful not to spoil the public space and nature. And if I met others who care about the same thing I try to help them, or the other way around I try to learn from them.

User avatar
Posts: 1624
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:34 am
Location: Hong Kong

Re: IPCC report

Post by Seppia »

I found it less catastrophic then I would have expected, but I did not read all 42 pages in detail.

Personally, my faith in humanity isn’t exactly sky high, when I see people buying 2 ton teslas in HK “because environment” when HK has The most efficient and cheap public transport system I’ve ever seen (and I’ve seen great ones, not even Tokyo is this good for this cheap) I just shake my head.

I also really sympathize with those (I think Modi was one of them) that say that the developed world cannot expect developing countries to avoid getting out of poverty to save the planet, when on a per capita basis the carbon footprint of the west is much higher.
The USA with 300 and something million people has double the carbon footprint of India with 1.3 billion.
Some people in India are still starving, they need cheap electricity (for example), not “green” electricity. So coal plants it is.

We can be many on this planet, or we could be few with high per capita footprint.
That’s why I really respect Jacob’s approach: what is the level of consumption that would be sustainable, on average?

That’s how he got to his $7k per year per person IIRC.

I was working towards that, and almost got there in Italy, but took a big step backwards moving to HK.
Because where you live I believe greatly influences your ability to reduce consumption.
For example, in HK it’s almost impossible to survive without using the air conditioning for at least 4 months per year, no need in northern Italy.
In HK almost all of the food is imported, think how wasteful is bringing in meat in a reefer container at -30C from Australia.
Of course one can adjust (we eat even less beef than we used to, now down to something like once every other month, we keep the air on on 27C, etc), but you can’t beat 1€/kg tomatoes in season from the local growers, or the winds from the alps that give you 26C nights in august in the small town where I own my apartment.

Site Admin
Posts: 13429
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73

Re: IPCC report

Post by jacob »

Okay, I've read the Working Group 1 (physics basis) technical summary... that is, the summary for the nerds. I'm only commenting on it here, because it has material consequences for housing/location plans.

However, since CC likely still take less than one forum page before it triggers another culture war, I'm going to leave the thread locked and request nobody start future ones.

Biggest AR5->AR6 developments as I see them.
  1. It's been 7 years since the last assessment report and computational precision has increased a lot. Many conclusions have gone from "likely" or "very likely" to "virtually certain".
  2. Confirms SR1.5 that differences between 1.0 (where we are now) and 1.5 (ditto 1.5 and 2.0) will be regional and robust. (IOW, a 0.5 difference is not just naively "a tiny bit warmer"... it's stuff you'd notice, like more storm damage, heat stroke hospitalizations, cities lost to flooding or fires...).
  3. 1.5C is now committed and will be passed in the early 2030s for ALL scenarios (even the "green(*) ones"). It's now too late to avoid. This is TEN years earlier than the more optimistic projections from earlier reports. [What happened is that humanity spent the last decade doing approximately nothing beyond shifting the chairs around]
  4. 2.0C will be passed in all but the "greenest(*) ones" about 15 years later.
(*) Where "green tech" global plans to reduce emissions by x% per year until net 0 is reached are implemented immediately. This also presumes eventual global scale implementation of carbon capture and sequestration---a technology that's still in the prototype stage. I still see the "green tech" scenarios as politically and economically unrealistic---these are WWII-mobilization type efforts and humans have so far demonstrated zero capacity for agreement on any scale from national to global.

ERE relevance: 2+3 means that you have about 10 years to fix your housing/location situation---possibly less in terms of price signals changing once others start placing their bets. And for those looking to move into or live in future hot spots like the Mediterranian, SE/SW-US, ... which will see faster change, should start adapting your insurance plans, home mechanics, and vegetation (fires, shade) to deal with those differences e.g. fire/air particulate filtration, flooding, drought, storms, and A/C because what's installed in those areas today may not be adequate in terms of preventing "the suck" for what you'll see "by the time newborns reach school age". This, of course, also goes for other areas e.g. PNW housing w/o AC.

Overall AR6 certainly reads darker than the previous ARs and I think it has to do with the narrowing of the uncertainty ranges. Previously one could (and people did!) find or insert a dose of hopium both in terms of the physical uncertainty (precision) and the "time to act" of the emissions scenarios but everything is getting increasingly locked in.