The EPA cited my paper in their argument against the endangerment finding today.
-
The EPA cited my paper in their argument against the endangerment finding today. However, their point is completely backwards: my paper actually supports the EPA's 2009 range of 1.8C to 4C warming by 2100. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3
-
The EPA cited my paper in their argument against the endangerment finding today. However, their point is completely backwards: my paper actually supports the EPA's 2009 range of 1.8C to 4C warming by 2100. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3
Specifically, in our paper we argue that RCP4.5 or RCP6.0 are more realistic representations of 2100 warming under current policy than the increasingly implausible RCP8.5 scenario. But the lower of those two – RCP4.5 – gives a 2100 warming range of 1.8C to 4C!
-
Specifically, in our paper we argue that RCP4.5 or RCP6.0 are more realistic representations of 2100 warming under current policy than the increasingly implausible RCP8.5 scenario. But the lower of those two – RCP4.5 – gives a 2100 warming range of 1.8C to 4C!
Its only the high end warming outcomes of >4C that have become increasingly unlikely as the world has moved toward lower emissions scenarios. The wide range of climate sensitivity and carbon cycle feedbacks still makes it impossible to rule out up to 4C: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/29768659241304854
-
J jeppe@uddannelse.social shared this topic
