Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Global Temperature Set To Reach 1 Degree C Over Pre-Industrial Levels (metoffice.gov.uk)

Posted by Soulskill on from the some-like-it-hot dept.

Layzej writes: Based on data from January to September, the HadCRUT dataset shows 2015 global mean temperature at 1.02 degrees C (±0.11 degrees C) above pre-industrial levels for the first time. The Copenhagen Accord recognizes "the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius (PDF)." Physicist Ken Rice points out that the next degree Celsius may be closer than we think. "It's taken us about 160 years to warm by about 1 degree C. This is associated with emissions of about 550GtC (550 billion tonnes of carbon, or ~2000 billion tonnes of CO2). Current emissions are around 10GtC/year. If we continue emitting as we are, we will double our cumulative emissions in about 50 years. If we continue to increase our emissions, it will be even sooner.

2 of 735 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Who measured in pre-industrial times? by Cyberax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    & who indeed measured broadly enough to be statistically good measurement?

    Scientists.

    & who determined that it was not one of many long term cyclical changes that have occurred for millions of years.

    Scientists.

    & who will pay the cost of all the government activity? Every reader of Slashdot along with everyone else.

    Yes, it's much better to pretend that nothing happens and then scream for the government help once your house is underwater or your tap runs dry in a drought.

    & what if their efforts do not work?

    And what if they do work?

  2. Re:So? by bigpat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what?

    1) Global Climate change is disruptive and people will unnecessarily die or live worse-off because of the resulting displacement of peoples.
    2) We can be carbon neutral in 30 years if we create large scale subsidies in existing state of the art in nuclear power. (oh and throw in a few renewable sources for up to about 30% of the total requirements)

    And

    3) If you think we can be carbon neutral and meet the energy needs of civilization with just subsidized renewables then you are the same as a "climate denier" because pretending to solve a problem (to get your extremely inadequate pet projects funded) is in effect no better than denying the problem and just waiting to run out of economically viable fossil fuels.