SotA-R-7: Current Models Predict 4°C of Global Warming
(This is part 7 of the “Stages of the Anthropocene, Revisited” Series (SotA-R).) Important Note (March 3, 2022) Due to a fundamental flaw in models 1, 2, and 3 in this series, the predictions for average global warming in this article are unreliable. Update (May 21, 2022) Model 4 fixes this problem and predicts +3.7°C. There’s no plausible peaceful path to carbon-neutrality. If there’s one key takeaway from my attempts to model carbon (CO₂-equivalent) emissions in stage 1 of the anthropocene, it’s that. Oh, and that’s it will get hot, of course. Unpleasantly hot. This the fourth in a series...
SotA-R-6: Modeling Carbon Emissions – New Results, and Thoughts on Further Models
(This is part 6 of the “Stages of the Anthropocene, Revisited” Series (SotA-R).) Important Note (March 3, 2022) Due to a fundamental flaw in models 1, 2, and 3 in this series, the predictions for average global warming in this article are unreliable. Update (May 21, 2022) Model 4 fixes this problem and predicts +3.7°C. As mentioned in the section “limitations and alternative approaches” of the previous episode in this series, there were a couple of things I wanted to change in the model (i.e. spreadsheet) used to simulate global carbon (CO₂-equivalent) emissions in stage 1 of the anthropocene. The...
Stages of the Anthropocene
preface (2022) There are major mistakes in the predictions and calculations involved in this article. For an attempt to come up with better predictions (and thus, an update of this article), see the SotA-R series. The model results presented in the last episode thereof, suggest 3°C to 5°C of average global warming. (Original post) — Climate scientists don’t often look at the distant future and when they do, their “predictions” are so vague that they hardly count as predictions at all. Most published work on climate change focuses on the current century. There are good reasons, for this, of course...
Crisis and Inertia (3) – Technological Threats and Crises
(This is part 3 in the “Crisis and Inertia” series.) Some advances of technology are feared by many. Some of those fears may be justified; others less so. Nuclear weapons are an obvious threat, but whether artificial intelligence (AI), for example, is likely to cause our demise is more controversial. This series isn’t about threats or fears, however, but about crises. The difference is that threats or fears may materialize, while crises are either already occurring or are unavoidable and thus will occur. Nuclear weapons are not a crisis, but their use would be, and as both the probability of...