Exclusive: Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds

Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds

Hundreds of the world’s leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) this century, blasting past internationally agreed targets and causing catastrophic consequences for humanity and the planet, an exclusive Guardian survey has revealed.

Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating above preindustrial levels, while almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit will be met.

Many of the scientists envisage a “semi-dystopian” future, with famines, conflicts and mass migration, driven by heatwaves, wildfires, floods and storms of an intensity and frequency far beyond those that have already struck.

Numerous experts said they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided.

  • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
    14·
    6 months ago

    Sorry, you said methane and i assumed you were talking about carbon capture from fossile fuel plants.

    None of those are current solutions, step 1 is they release the co2 from the ocean. There is no step 2.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      4·
      6 months ago

      That’s simply not true. There are many models that convert it to bicarbonate or ethanol, building materials, bioplastics, or bind the carbon in solid form to be safely released back into the environment. The problem is they’re all expensive.

      • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
        22·
        6 months ago

        Oh, those werent in the link you provided, or in what i found looking at current carbon capture technology.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          4·
          6 months ago

          Search for “captured carbon conversion” to find out more about that step. Here are a few options, but there are countless more. We have many smart scientists that create solutions often. They rarely receive funding to take the initiatives out of the laboratory.

          https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientist-discover-how-to-convert-co2-into-powder-that-can-be-stored-for-decades/

          https://energy.stanford.edu/research/research-areas/carbon-removal/co2-conversion-use

          https://news.mit.edu/2022/turning-carbon-dioxide-valuable-products-0907

          • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
            24·
            6 months ago

            Man they all talk about making carbon neutral fuel out of it. Taking the co2 out and putting it right back in

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              5·
              6 months ago

              One way to offset today’s high costs of carbon capture is to convert captured greenhouse gases – particularly CO2 and methane – into valuable chemicals, including carbon-neutral fuels, rather than sequester them. CO2 can be converted into ethanol or methanol, which can then be upgraded to gasoline and jet fuel. The combust-capture-convert cycle could be carbon-neutral or at least have very low carbon emissions. Other valuable products that could be made from captured CO2 include acetic acid, urea, plastics, construction materials, and biofuel from algae.

              That’s from the Stanford link provided above.

              • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
                11·
                6 months ago

                Man they all talk about making carbon neutral fuel out of it.

                convert captured greenhouse gases – particularly CO2 and methane – into valuable chemicals, including carbon-neutral fuels, rather than sequester them.

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  3·
                  6 months ago

                  Read the rest of that paragraph.

                  Other valuable products that could be made from captured CO2 include acetic acid, urea, plastics, construction materials, and biofuel from algae.

                  The only reason they’re leaning into fuel creation is to generate a profitable product to secure funding. There are many more responsible ways to convert the carbon that would cost more money because they don’t yield a profitable product. So to bring it back to the point of my claim, more money would help.

                  • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    11·
                    6 months ago

                    no, this is what their research does, it creates carbon neutral fuel(or low carbon considering its an energy consuming process).

                    you wanted to show me that co2 can be used to make plastics and construction materials, and these people want to suggest it to secure more funding, but it hasnt been done yet.