RT @valmasdel: @GaetanHeymes @IPCC_CH Cette figure explicative provient de : https://t.co/RV6SpLnuCm Note, plus on se rapproche d'un nivea…
@GaetanHeymes @IPCC_CH Cette figure explicative provient de : https://t.co/RV6SpLnuCm Note, plus on se rapproche d'un niveau cible, plus l'incertitude est importante par rapport aux estimations de budget résiduel. Détails dans l'article ESSD.
@peteirvine Hi @peteirvine, the definition of this concept is in line with the Art. 4. of the #ParisAgreement which accounts only for human-made emissions and removal. The carbon budget compatible for 1.5°C/2°C/etc. may include these terms (as climate feed
@JensTerhaar @PFriedling @HMcJeon3y4 @JamesGDyke You may find explanations here https://t.co/OCkJ7RMfLz
@VeroWendland @David_Wortmann @_FriedrichMerz KLIMAKRISE droht, denn das „Kohlenstoffbudget“, das wir noch haben – um Pariser Abkommen einzuhalten – ist sehr begrenzt ! "Verbleibendes Kohlenstoffbudget" ist ein kompliziertes Thema : Anbei Link zu 2 aktuell
Resolved: In the spirt of the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, we declare a moratorium on the use of the following bullshit terms: carbon budget, credits, markets, capture, negative emissions technologies market-based solutions net-zero reference to
RT @openclimatedata: @yl_oswald @hausfath @JoeriRogelj Not too different i think. As for non-CO2 maybe "Non-CO2 contribution to future warm…
RT @JoeriRogelj: Hi guys, does this help? In SR15 we did as follows (described easier in the follow-up @Nature perspective https://t.co/8d…
Hi guys, does this help? In SR15 we did as follows (described easier in the follow-up @Nature perspective https://t.co/8dO6wPEqnD) We didn't estimate the effect of every individual change since AR6, but you're welcome to do so :) @Peters_Glen @hausfath
@Darkellysio @3dMachaon @AndreHatz @EDFofficiel Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2 é
@BPistre @SPPEF @bernstephane @EmmanuelMacron @ventdesmaires @barbarapompili @ADESAA3 @PPEEBPORG @EnergieVerite @DocuVerite Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limi
@aubreygci @hausfath @ProfTimJackson @planetkooler @mowinsmd @leggett @PeteBlurg @seasonalight @carboncoach @DavidHembrow @SoundsNoble @barlowco 1/2) Aubrey, I am wary of these "remaining budgets",whose estimates have much uncertainty. The 320 Gt CO2 came
@Peters_Glen @EdwardByers @JoeriRogelj and others discuss carbon budget calculations (and why the independent approach makes sense) here https://t.co/PKukqKijAz
RT @JoeriRogelj: That gives us a total of 0.97°C of GSAT warming between the 1850-1900 and 2006-2015 period. I acknowledge that it the inf…
That gives us a total of 0.97°C of GSAT warming between the 1850-1900 and 2006-2015 period. I acknowledge that it the information isn't easy to find, but additional explanations can also be found here. https://t.co/8dO6wPmOZ3 https://t.co/R9Lm0chIJO
@k_stukenberg @Steffenster Genau das ist der Punkt, deutlich unter 2 Grad ist beschlossen und neuere Studien legen nahe, das das noch vorhandene Budget insbesondere für 1,5 Grad deutlich kleiner ist als im IPCC 2018 Report genannt https://t.co/9FojQcMoKK h
@Darkellysio @freechelmi @bcassoret @PaulNeau Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2 étu
@charliemerland @Thomas_Auriel @Izno91 @PaulNeau Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2
@Legoaldesyeti Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2 études récentes: (3) https://t.co
@Winfried_Kropp Solche Vorwürfe dürfen Sie gerne näher spezifizieren, sonst wirkt das hilflos. Fakt ist, dass a) kein verbindlicher Zeitpunkt zur Erreichung der Klimaneutralität vereinbart wurde und b) ein Erreichen des Ziels nach 2030 fatale Folgen haben
@BlancAlpha @HANSHugo38 @sdnfr @StephaneLauer Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2 étu
@energie_crise @nikopol Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le link de 2 études récentes: (3) htt
@michel_raoux + de précisions ici : https://t.co/RV6SpLnuCm (l'encadré 2 détaille l'approche mise en oeuvre dans le rapport SR15). Le 0.97°C est une estimation du changement de GSAT (moyenne planétaire) à partir des obs. HadCRU (GMST), différences (SST-SAT
@hausfath @richardabetts @gcarbonproject @CarbonBrief Remaining carbon budget ... Rogelj et al. Box 2 https://t.co/KfkqiYXc7o limiting to 1.5 °C with 66% probabilities remainin carbon budget is 320 Gt CO2 World population 7.7 billions gives 42 tonnes e
@fagandr1 @DMRDartford What about the #data displaying #carbonbudget to prevent further #climateforcing ? Transitioning to #carbonzerotech will lower #risk. #greenhousegases are at an all time high in human history. The #climateemergency is only an emergen
@MyCattleLog @EcoSenseNow 👉🏻 https://t.co/u2BpXqHME7 👈🏻 We can predict what will happen at current rates if we do nothing, if we restrict #CO2 release, and if we go #carbonneutral. This stuff stays in the atmosphere for a long long time. #carbonzeroby2050
@HazizaEmma L'évolution future du climat va profondément dépendre des choix qui seront faits pour réduire ou non les émissions de CO2, et l'effet net sur le climat des autres facteurs. Voir par exemple ce schéma issu de : https://t.co/RV6SpLnuCm https://t
@Eco_melon @theresphysics @StuartBCapstick @DarkOptimism @kalahar1 @antonioguterres @rpancost @rahmstorf IPCC lead author Rogelj discussed in a paper how budget & modelling for budgets can be approached. https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA Acc to him and his new
@AukeHoekstra I think you seriously need to revise your standard for what constitutes a mockery of science. For that matter this isn't even a communications strategy. See https://t.co/q0lI2qsk56 for an approach to including unmodeled feedbacks in project
@Sou_HotWhopper @hausfath @KevinClimate The budget perspective: 235Gt CO2 as of 1.1.2020 for 66% chance at 1.5˚ That translates to 465ppm at the end, when ff-CO2 is zero. Feasible with ad hoc 35% reduction, ie superfluous consumerism; catching resulting
@theresphysics @JamesGDyke @DoctorVive @KevinClimate The budget for 66% chance at 1.5˚ without CCS is 235Gt on 1.1.2020. @JoeriRogelj presented that figure at COP. This is his discussion of the topic: https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA It's illogical and amounts to
@alxrdk @driven_by_data @lisacrost @ed_hawkins @neilrkaye @kevpluck @RARohde @visualisingdata @ZLabe @DrSimEvans @Peters_Glen @JoeriRogelj Some possible illustrations that can go to page 108 in AR6 and into exec summary: I particularly like this linear dec
RT @anlomedad: @HalleVerkehrt @BernhardDdot @SZ @GretaThunberg 😂 Wir alle. IPCC lead author Rogelj hat in Madrid beim COP die Zahlen für 1.…
@HalleVerkehrt @BernhardDdot @SZ @GretaThunberg 😂 Wir alle. IPCC lead author Rogelj hat in Madrid beim COP die Zahlen für 1.1.2020 vorgestellt. Sein paper dazu https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA, daraus die Textbox im 2. Bild. Er subtrahiert 100Gt Esfb, anstatt sie G
RT @JoeriRogelj: For those wondering how much #carbon budget is left and by when we should aim to be at #netzero: We present a new way of u…
Manuscript released from #wrro: https://t.co/mUAxW4mAeV #openaccess
@RyanTheMato @KHayhoe @GreenNewPenguin Uncertainty yes, sensitivity no. But uncertainty is no excuse to not try to include the full range of Earth system feedbacks already kicking in. See https://t.co/q0lI2qsk56.
Bonne nouvelle: grâce à la science, nous avons les outils pour estimer le budget carbone dont nous disposons encore. Question: on les utilise quand ces outils ? #ClimateEmergency https://t.co/6GFq3KQxnK
@AimeryAssire @Thomas_Auriel @bernardmartin86 @sdnfr Il y a «urgence climatique», car le «budget carbone» dont nous disposons encore - pour ne pas rater les accords de Paris - est très limité! «Budget carbone restant» est un sujet compliqué: ci-joint le li
@RARohde You can use the IPCC #SR15 approach: https://t.co/8dO6wPEqnD TCRE quasi linear up to ca. 2000 PgC; other puzzle pieces need appropriate adjustment: non-CO2 warming will be higher, ZEC might be higher, permafrost contributions will be higher, etc M
@BCNThomson @AndrewDessler The problem has been lack of enough data to model these processes. Even now, when we're starting to get some estimates, modelers resist just adding in those tonnes. But some scientists are starting to advocate for doing so anyway
@JohnMChristoph @SomervilleYIMBY @Short_epics For a good overview of recent work on the carbon budgets from some of the SR15 chapter two authors: https://t.co/A72Bn39wi2
@AukeHoekstra 8.5 remains a plausible worst case, not BAU. Re the quantification, what's needed is a comprehensive expert elicitation process as described in https://t.co/q0lI2qsk56. The partial quantification we do have is very concerning. Michael wasn't
@MLiebreich @KHayhoe @CostaSamaras @hausfath @jritch Michael, I'm done beating my head against your wall on this, but if you're going to keep on with it at least do everyone a favor and promote the reform laid out in https://t.co/q0lI2qsk56. We must accoun
@DaddyD0dd I agree. I'm just saying don't blame people who are also victims of society's desire to look the other way on this stuff. Have you seen https://t.co/q0lI2qsk56, BTW? The issue is at least out in the open now. The task is to get it done soon and
@mammuthus *sigh* This is arguing about a mouse while ignoring the elephant in the room, i.e. the unmodeled feedbacks. I've been complaining about this critical shortfall for years, and only very recently does there seem to be some traction on dealing with
stringent climate targets Joeri Rogelj, Piers M. Forster, Elmar Kriegler, Christopher J. Smith & Roland Séférian Nature volume 571, pages335–342(2019) https://t.co/a6tmwyq8sA
RT @mammuthus: @RARohde This new paper is the latest proposed science on the subject and you could use it to calculate higher budgets I thi…
@RARohde This new paper is the latest proposed science on the subject and you could use it to calculate higher budgets I think (if you had the time) https://t.co/FJRxml4Cuk
RT @JoeriRogelj: @MichaelEMann @hausfath @valmasdel @CarbonBrief They actually wouldn't, despite obviously being smaller See Suppl. Table…
@MichaelEMann @hausfath @valmasdel @CarbonBrief They actually wouldn't, despite obviously being smaller See Suppl. Table 2 of our @nature paper The only neg. value in that table is from a paper reporting cum. CO2 until 2100 after overshoot for scenarios
@MichaelEMann A robust assessment requires to compare all approaches to estimate remaining carbon budgets within a common framework (eg. ref period, hist. estimates, but also temperature metrics used, eg GMST vs GSAT etc). One is proposed by @JoeriRogelj e
Bear in mind most feedbacks are accounted for within C-budgets though, so only feedbacks unresolved in models reduce the budget (as per https://t.co/I6ea934R4q). Forest dieback is at least partially resolved; permafrost not so much. But the C-budget certai
The C budget sums broadly check out. There's ~500GtCO2 left for a chance at 1.5C (https://t.co/I6ea934R4q), & permafrost might emit ~36GtC (=132GtCo2) under RCP2p6 (https://t.co/CwtHkMA3g7), so higher than their 100GtCO2 & slumping could increase i
RT @anlomedad: @Peters_Glen @ClimateAdam "Excluding Additional Earth System Feedbacks" that's what it says in this table in IPCC SR15. And…
RT @anlomedad: @Peters_Glen @ClimateAdam "Excluding Additional Earth System Feedbacks" that's what it says in this table in IPCC SR15. And…
@Peters_Glen @ClimateAdam "Excluding Additional Earth System Feedbacks" that's what it says in this table in IPCC SR15. And @JoeriRogelj discussed it, too in his recent proposal https://t.co/VO6FwjHzmV So the budget for 66% chance at 1.5˚as of 1.1.2020 is
@Knutti_ETH @physicspod @ClimateAdam "Excluding Additional Earth System Feedbacks" that's what it says in this table in IPCC SR15. And @JoeriRogelj discussed it, too in his recent proposal https://t.co/VO6FwjHzmV So the budget for 66% chance at 1.5 as of 1
@ClimateOfGavin @mat_collins @ed_hawkins @ClimateAdam "Excluding Additional Earth System Feedbacks" that's what it says in this table in IPCC SR15. And @JoeriRogelj, Lead Author Budgets, discussed it, too in his recent proposal https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA So t
RT @anlomedad: @HalleVerkehrt Ah. Die steht da am unteren Bildrand, siehst Du? Hier zum Klicken https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA
RT @anlomedad: @HalleVerkehrt Ah. Die steht da am unteren Bildrand, siehst Du? Hier zum Klicken https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA
@Daniel58304312 @Luisamneubauer Damit man nicht immer noch n 2. Tweet dranhängen muss für die "eigentlich abzuziehenden 100Gt", könnten wir sie einfach einheitlich als "1.1.2018 320Gt" kommunizeren? Ab 1.1.2020 nur noch 245Gt für 66% Chance. Als Quelle kan
@HalleVerkehrt Ah. Die steht da am unteren Bildrand, siehst Du? Hier zum Klicken https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA
@rutherdan 1.5C-ish, from 2018 https://t.co/wQAkIYPZoN https://t.co/3a1kFiFQVB
Remaining budget of about 800Gt CO2 can be found here: https://t.co/wQAkIYPZoN
@alxrdk @FridayForFuture @parents4future @tgrdebate @ExtinctionR_DE Hm. Solche Phasen hab ich auch. 💚 https://t.co/DBtXvGSZ90 beschreibt in epischer Breite, warum das Restbudget ohne grossartig künstliches NET in 2019 320Gt gross war. Jedenfalls, wie ich
Yess!! Maybe prepare for it by memorizing 320Gt CO2 as of July 2019 as remaining 1.5˚budget for a 66% chance (https://t.co/VO6FwjHzmV) and by watching this short clip on official current Paris reduction targets of all states leading to +4˚C https://t.co/F
@ClimateUEA_ @AsherMinns @clequere @GreenRupertRead @uniofeastanglia @UEAResearch Yess!! Maybe prepare for it by memorizing 320Gt CO2 as of July 2019 as remaining 1.5˚budget for a 66% chance (https://t.co/VO6FwjHzmV) and by watching this short clip on off
@robertpossnett1 Yess!! Maybe prepare for it by memorizing 320Gt CO2 as of July 2019 as remaining 1.5˚budget for a 66% chance (https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA) and by watching this short clip on official current Paris reduction targets leading to +4˚C https://t.c
@beyond_ideology Quelle für 320GT CO2 Restbudget global für 66% Chance auf 1.5˚, Stand Juli 2019: https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA https://t.co/ATQFzaoLSA
@xrgeeks @ak48er @Jumpsteady methinks, the year isn't important. It's the amount of remaining CO2 for 66% chance on staying at 1.5˚. That was 320Gt July 2019. Without magic tricks and deus ex machina. https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA And how to invest this capital
RT @anlomedad: @HalleVerkehrt Quelle https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA @Rahmstorf hat leider zu 1.75˚gebloggt u im Zeitungsartikel geschrieben, weil…
@HalleVerkehrt Quelle https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA @Rahmstorf hat leider zu 1.75˚gebloggt u im Zeitungsartikel geschrieben, weil 1.75 ="deutlich unter 2˚" u weil er zeigen wollte, wie Klimapaket nich mal DAS Budget einhält. 1.5˚gilt! Bitte hört auf, 1.75˚zu ve
@HenningWind @parents4future @polenz_r @rahmstorf nein, ist es nicht. Guckstu Artikel aus Juli 2019, aus dem der Screenshot oben stammt. https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA
@pauleastwd @GlobalEcoGuy @neilhimself 320Gt CO2 for 66% chance on 1.5˚ as per this paper https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA that's 42tpp remaining if states don't buy emission rights from others and overlook equity. But with building a sustainable system every natio
RT @anlomedad: @fwieschollek @HalleVerkehrt empfehle dazu den Artikel, aus dem die Screenshots stammen. 2x an 2 verschiedenen Tagen lesen w…
@fwieschollek @HalleVerkehrt empfehle dazu den Artikel, aus dem die Screenshots stammen. 2x an 2 verschiedenen Tagen lesen war als nicht-Fachfrau hilfreich. Er verdeutlicht jeden der Budget-Faktoren&wie sie gehandhabt wurden (was "diese ganzen Tonne" k
@MarcusWadsak @TerliWetter 🤔in 2016 galt 600Gt als 50% Chance auf 1.5˚und 800Gt als 33% Chance. Hier in "Box 2An" https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA stehen die Restbudgets Stand Juli 2019 mit den Probabilities in %. Für 66% Chance auf 1.5˚ sinds noch 320Gt. Wir ha
@bluebowerbird @HomoErectial @aal02115 @TravelXena @2 The text below is "Box 2An" from https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA Once the budget for 1.5˚is depleted, our socioeconomic systems must sustain a life on 0.7t CO2e/pppa to keep the atmospheric concentration from
@strmsn @Quantensalat @berndulrich Rahmstorf legt 1.75˚ zugrunde. Ich bestehe auf 😊unserem Recht auf 1.5˚. Für 66% Chance auf 1.5˚ waren es im Juli 2019 noch 320Gt (+- 250 Gt) Siehe "Box 2An" in: https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA https://t.co/niJYkrA90K
@drandreaskruger @TerliWetter @HansHuckebein7 This figure though seems out of date. Per IPCC SR15 the budget is much lower. The conclusion that emissions must fall in 2020 is still true -- but double-digit %'s. https://t.co/A72Bn39wi2
@f2135 @rahmstorf Rahmstorf zielt auf 1.75˚. Wir haben ein Recht auf 1.5˚ Die versinkenden Inselstaaten verhandelten den Satz hinein: "alle Anstrengung [für 1.5˚]zu unternehmen" Hier ist die aktuelle Quelle von Juli 2019 für das verbleibende 1.5˚Budget: 3
@Kai_Wehnemann @Daniel58304312 @aguleB @HaufeStephan @TiloJung @Umweltbundesamt Wg dem CO2 (rein) Budget noch die Quelle für 320Gt bei 66% Chance auf 1.5˚, Stand Juli 2019. https://t.co/DBtXvHaAxA Blau markiert der Budget-Unterschied zum SR15, der Earth S
RT @tkatsumi06j: @emmatheoptimist @GretaThunberg I can afford to give Ms. Thunburg the benefit of the doubt, but as the phrase implies, it…
RT @tkatsumi06j: @emmatheoptimist @GretaThunberg I can afford to give Ms. Thunburg the benefit of the doubt, but as the phrase implies, it…
@emmatheoptimist @GretaThunberg I can afford to give Ms. Thunburg the benefit of the doubt, but as the phrase implies, it means I can only rely on the science she professes to the point where evidence is provided but not beyond where there are still uncert
RT @anlomedad: @smkraus_ @DevsForFuture @Ney_Berlin @riffklima @MCC_Berlin 👍💚best available science dafür verwenden? https://t.co/4xO7RJnH3D
@smkraus_ @DevsForFuture @Ney_Berlin @riffklima @MCC_Berlin 👍💚best available science dafür verwenden? https://t.co/4xO7RJnH3D