New 2026 Study Finds the AMOC Collapse is Accelerating Far Beyond Previous Models
Posted by Rich-Limit4590@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 207 comments
The latest data from 2026 establishes that the planet’s primary life-support systems are failing at a rate that outpaces all previous scientific models. Seven of the nine "planetary boundaries"—the thresholds required for a stable human civilization—have now been crossed, including the recent breach of ocean acidification limits. The AMOC ocean current is approaching a tipping point where recovery becomes physically impossible above 350 ppm of $CO_2$; with current levels at 425 ppm, the door to a stable climate is effectively locking behind us.
This collapse triggers irreversible feedback loops, such as the Southern Ocean flipping from a carbon sink to a source, which will independently add 0.2°C to global warming. Warming rates have nearly doubled since 2015, accelerating to 0.35°C per decade, which pulls projected 2060 catastrophes forward into the 2040s. Coral reefs are already recognized as the first fully realized tipping point, currently undergoing a terminal die-off that dismantles the foundation of marine life.
The human cost is defined by a permanent, structural decline rather than a temporary crisis. Humid heatwaves are reaching the 35°C wet-bulb threshold where human physiological cooling fails, while up to 50% of global grazing land is projected to become unviable by 2100. These systemic failures are expected to culminate in a 22% reduction in global GDP, a $133 trillion annual loss that historically characterizes the terminal collapse of civilizations.
Deep-Arm5652@reddit
Nobody will do anything. Go enjoy your life while you can.
Bandits101@reddit
That is true of course but if something can be done what would it be? I wonder if anyone or any group has a plan. Perhaps people think we’ll build an Arc somewhere, so a select few can survive the next ten thousand years.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
We probably could try to transition to a mix of nuclear and renewables but:
ttystikk@reddit
I disagree strongly: 1. Positive incentives are already making enormous inroads, in spite of official policy that still heavily supports fossil fuels. People generally don't need to be forced to adopt a good idea. 2. False on its face; Quality of life EVERYWHERE RENEWABLES ARE BEING INSTALLED is rising, not deteriorating! 3. When people have control over their own energy, that's enormously empowering and cuts against wealth polarization. 4. The evidence points in exactly the opposite direction; this is fear mongering, plain and simple.
HommeMusical@reddit
Can you point to these inroads on this graph? https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions
Even just to stay steady state, we need to return to the levels of emission we had on that graph in around 1930. How is this going to happen, exactly, particularly since almost all countries now seem to have given up on their net zero plans, and are instead going full tilt on AI and other energy intensive products?
I disagree with your take on this, but what I'm downvoting is the insult, not the bad reasoning.
ttystikk@reddit
So because we aren't fixing the ENTIRE problem INSTANTLY, it can't possibly be good enough. And you're telling me that I'm the one who's being unrealistic?!
Also, calling fear mongering what it is isn't insulting; it's descriptive.
HommeMusical@reddit
You could try answering my argument. Here it is again:
"Even just to stay steady state, we need to return to the levels of emission we had on that graph in around 1930. How is this going to happen, exactly, particularly since almost all countries now seem to have given up on their net zero plans, and are instead going full tilt on AI and other energy intensive products?"
"INSTANTLY"?
We have known about the possibility of global heating for almost two centuries.
LBJ was given a memo about climate change and CO2 emissions in 1965.
We've known it was a crisis for decades. Obama talked about it as a candidate, though as President he did less than https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2023/06/we-now-know-the-full-extent-of-obamas-disastrous-apathy-toward-the-climate-crisis
And yet emissions continue to grow exponentially up to this present day.
Yes, you are completely and utterly unrealistic. You don't explain how this exponential growth will suddenly reverse to bring emissions down by 95%. You don't explain your reasoning at all - you simply yell.
ttystikk@reddit
So all the benefits of installing solar PV and wind around the world mean nothing because they don't solve the whole problem immediately.
The reasoning is so obvious that I didn't think I needed to explain it; every Watt generated by renewables means 3.414 BTu (times three because fossil fuel generation is on average 30% efficient) of fossil fuels is NOT being burned.
Sorry, not buying your bullshit.
HommeMusical@reddit
(Quibble, you can't compare watts, a measure of power, to BTUs, a measure of energy, but I get what you mean, which I discuss more in the footnote.)
If this were what was happening, it'd be great!
Renewables are growing fast - but fossil fuels are also still growing.
The renewables are not replacing the fossil fuel power but adding to it. Everyone uses more power, a mix of cheap wind, cheap solar on a broad fossil fuel base. New, wildly extravagant users of power like AI and crypto spring up from nowhere and spread like a disease, users which are socially negative but very profitable to a few antisocial individuals.
It is Jevons's Paradox - the cheap renewables encourage more energy use in total.
In around five years, fossil fuel use is predicted to plateau. (This has been announced in decades before and new technology postponed it, but this time it really looks like it will happen.)
There's no plans for it to stop or even to ramp down. They need to leave almost everything that's there in the ground to avoid catastrophe, but they would never let it lie. They'll burn it all until it's just not economic to get any, and that will be a long way from now.
And on top of that we have concrete and meat, each of which on their own emits more CO2 than the environment can take up.
I understand why you are angry. I cannot express the range of emotions on this subject that have racked my soul since I first heard about CO2 pollution and the greenhouse effect, over fifty years ago now. At the time, we all took for granted that something would be done, given the magnitude of the problem. Not only was nothing done, the problem accelerated in every way faster than expected - more consumption of all resources, more waste of almost every type (except Freon).
But the objective, numerical facts are very grim. It's important for everyone to understand how bad the situation really is, so that we can respond appropriately.
The last time in geological history that CO2 levels were this high, water levels were 20 meters higher than today.
The UN's COP has been saying for years now that in order to avoid disaster, we need to reduce emissions down to to net zero and beyond that, we need to fairly soon start pumping millions of tonnes of CO2 out of the atmosphere every year for generations.
Essentially, we would fairly soon have to reformulate our society on a war footing, where the war wasn't against humans, but against exponential growth of consumption and waste.
Everyone would have to tighten their belts, particularly the rich who account for a disproportionately large amount of the emissions, but even middle class people. The economy would shrink. Jobs would vanish. Whole areas of the economy would vanish overnight, to be replaced by nothing.
Do you really think this will happen?
I've talked a lot here.
Why don't you lay out your plan, with some sort of estimates at numbers?
Start with this:
Unimportant footnote
Just no. :-)
ttystikk@reddit
Jesus jumping Jones, kid.
Yes, a Watt is equivalent to 3.414 BTu of heat. The whole damn science of HVAC is built on this equation. Learn your physics and units.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your drivel because it's clear you run on feelings rather than data.
Good luck with that.
HommeMusical@reddit
You are completely and utterly wrong.
British thermal units are a unit of energy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_thermal_unit
Watts are a unit of of power, which is energy divided by time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt
Power and energy are very different: https://www.britannica.com/science/What-Is-the-Difference-Between-Energy-and-Power
An imperial measure of power is BTUs per hour. Note that second part, per hour. That's the difference between power and energy.
This is a beginner mistake on your part. I literally knew this 45 years ago. (Also, the names are watt, not "Watt", and BTU, not "BTu".)
You: "I do have actual science, but I'm not going to show it to you."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! You're not even convincing yourself!
I have a degree in mathematics; I've spent my life on computation and applied engineering.
You on the other hand don't seem to even have a high school knowledge of science. I'll bet you can't set up a mathematical model, solve a differential equation, or likely even take a derivative.
The level of arrogance it takes to pretend you're an expert in a field that you don't understand at all! I literally cannot imagine being you. Who are you fooling? Certainly not me: do you actually fool yourself?
Man, I tried to be polite to you, but you just double down on being rude, arrogant, and above all, totally wrong.
You seem young. You're going to find out what actually happens. Honestly, I feel bad for you. But it doesn't excuse your deliberate warping of science, or your personal rudeness.
ttystikk@reddit
Not unless you're 100.
Electricity converts directly to heat at the started rate; it doesn't matter if you're running a stove, a TV or a radio; energy in equals energy out. It's the first law of thermodynamics; clearly, you've never heard of it.
My understanding is not the one lacking here.
HommeMusical@reddit
Energy (BTUs) and power (watts) are very different things in exactly the same way that miles and miles per hour are very different.
You're not even convincing yourself.
I'm a professional; you're not even an amateur.
Both you and I know that you can't actually do physics; that you don't understand science even at a high school level; that you can't do any of the math at all.
For some reason I can't even hope to understand, you think by writing incoherent drivel with sciencey words in it will convince me of your competence.
It's like someone who understands a few words of English, bellowing them at me over and over, trying to convince me that they're the native speaker and I am not.
On re-reading this thread, you clearly have some sort of mental health issue that leads you to confabulate. Please get the help you so desperately need.
All my further responses will be directing you to the therapy. Please consider it.
ttystikk@reddit
If you have a problem with the first law of thermodynamics, I'm not the one who needs help.
HommeMusical@reddit
I have understood all the laws of thermodynamics for over 40 years, and the math.
Seek therapy for your serious mental health issues.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
I hope you are right.
ttystikk@reddit
We didn't get into this mess overnight; it took 200 years of industrial development.
What so many people here clearly fail to grasp is that the solutions exist, they're affordable, financially superior to fossil fuels even when factoring in adverse subsidies, and yet not only is adoption of renewable energy accelerating, the transition away from fossil fuels is happening dramatically more rapidly than their original adoption.
We have a bad case of making the perfect the enemy of progress going on in this sub and it's blinding people to the facts.
The most important of these facts is that renewables, thanks mostly to Chinese research, development, manufacturing and distribution, have consistently grown much faster than even the most optimistic predictions. That is the single most ignored truth in this entire subreddit.
Do challenges remain? Of course! Is there damage to the environment? Absolutely. Let us recognize that progress is not just possible, but inevitable.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
I hope you are right. In this string of comments we also discussed induced demand and jevons paradox.
Globally, fossil fuel use and emissions are rising, even though renewables are being deployed in record rates. Renewables are becoming a part of our energy mix instead of replacing fossil fuels.
But I still hope we will get through this. Donald Trump, our favourite ecoterrorist, may hasten our transition as western economies are cut off from fossil fuels.
ttystikk@reddit
The only place where energy usage is growing faster than renewable energy installation is the US. China's energy mix is trending away from fossil fuels, despite their generation of 4x the amount of electricity the US does.
The amount of renewables installed will simply keep accelerating because it's cheaper to install and operate and repair and maintain and replace. For the same reasons, building new nuclear power is no longer profitable.
Cultural-Answer-321@reddit
I think you don't understand the scale of the problem.
We can't stop the catastrophe at this point. The best we can do is TRY to mitigate the worst parts.
Billion of people are STILL going to prematurely die before the end of the century. And billions more after that. And the temperature will keep rising.
Today's action were yesterday's solutions. That does not means we should stop doing them. They are part of the mitigation. But there is no longer any solution.
ttystikk@reddit
Right. So of course we should all just give up and buy giant diesel pickups.
ANY progress is good.
Bandits101@reddit
How do renewables reduce GHG’s, how do they prevent 300 billion tons of ice melt annually, how do they stop the millions of equivalent atomic bombs of excess warming that’s going into the oceans every second.
You must have read somewhere that if we get off fossil fuels and stop emissions, that it will stop global warming. Have you ever thought to question that and research the idea.
Look for a peer reviewed science paper that shows that ceasing emissions will cause GHG concentrations to fall and cool the planet. If you find one could you show me.
FYI atmospheric green house gas concentrations will remain until they are removed by Earth’s natural carbon cycle, that required tens of thousand of years. Before that they will continue to rise.
Ice melting is decreasing albedo, permafrost thawing is releasing CH, carbon sinks like the Amazon are becoming a carbon source and ocean warming is killing carbon sequestration.
HommeMusical@reddit
Have an upvote!
I mean, if we stopped all emissions, then the CO2 level would start decreasing fairly soon thereafter.
The problem is that we aren't going to do that. We aren't going to get off fossil fuels, we aren't going to stop making concrete, we aren't going to stop animal agriculture, we aren't really going to do anything.
We're going to keep running toward the cliff until we fall off it.
Bandits101@reddit
How would CO2 begin decreasing if all emissions cease. Do you understand how the carbon cycle works? Most of GHG’s being emitted are being absorbed by the oceans, washed in with rain and acidifying, the remainder (excess) is mixing in varying levels of the atmosphere.
Coral is dying, no more sequestration there and planktons are dying, there goes a further means of sequestration. Soil was the biggest store of carbon on land but that has been largely killed by erosion and artificial fertilizer.
Deforestation that stored carbon is now a fraction of a fraction that once was. The Amazon the so called lungs of the Earth is now beginning to be an emitter and not a store of carbon.
I could go on forever with our problems but please do tell me how CO2 will quickly drop if all emissions cease, where did you learn that. Do you actually believe it.
I think it’s part of the reason we are in this mess. Most people simply believed that burning fossil fuels was our only problem and windmills, solar panels and EV’s will get us the get out of jail free card…..nobody stopped not question the narrative, they chose to believe it because otherwise they would have actually had to make sacrifices.
ttystikk@reddit
Exactly none of these are made worse with the use of renewables and many are actively improved.
HommeMusical@reddit
The half-life of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 27 years: https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-do-we-know-how-long-carbon-dioxide-remains-atmosphere
The environment absorbs CO2; about 8% of our current emissions, though that number is decreasing as we reach saturation.
If our emissions went to 0 - which would never happen - CO2 would start to decrease.
Your comment is long on insults and very short on facts and citations. Do better.
Bandits101@reddit
You need to understand what is written in your own link and not cherry pick items that suit your hopes and dreams. BTY written by a so called climate modeller.
Quick Google “Carbon dioxide (CO2) can remain in the atmosphere for hundreds to thousands of years, with some estimates suggesting that a significant portion can last for over 5,000 years. The exact duration varies depending on various factors, including how CO2 is absorbed by natural processes”. But keep looking you might find something to keep your hopes up.
If human emissions went to zero, emissions would continue due to triggered positive feedbacks, warming would continue until Earth via (as stated) natural carbon cycle finds a level to settle on.
Were you insulted but by what?
In the long term, very long term Earth may return to the habitable planet we ruined but it’s certainly not assured. Earth could overshoot into an ice age but I would guess the coming heat and destruction of much of life, might tip the planet into a new hotter norm.
It’s dumb speculation of course but what is certain, is this greenhouse effect that is causing global warming has no good outcome for the environmental conditions, that the vast majority of higher life forms evolved to exist.
HommeMusical@reddit
Your post is very short on facts and citations, but long on insults and poor reading skills.
The only reason I can see that you interpret my very doomer-y post, which gloomily says that even the pretty bad outcome of "steady state" is impossible, as "hopes and dreams" is because you wanted to shout your random science-like words at someone you can identify as an enemy.
Please go away now and shout at someone else.
ttystikk@reddit
You have made the perfect the enemy of any and all progress. That's just voting for the current situation with extra steps.
umwellanyways@reddit
Dizzy_Pop@reddit
I’m all for nuclear and renewables, and I think that IF there’s any way out, nuclear and renewables play an essential role in it.
The problem is Jevon’s Paradox. In short:
Yes, strictly speaking this deals with energy efficiency, but the basic principle remains: total energy use expands to available capacity.
Even if we ramp up nuclear and renewables, they won’t reduce demand for hydrocarbons. Instead, we’ll just use more energy.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
Yeeeah... I thought about induced demand and jevons paradox after commenting but didnt want to be too much of a doomer lol :D basically if we had command economy to transition to renewables, we would also need to get off fossil fuels in a planned way. Purely theoretical.
Modern "free market" economies cant pull this transition off. Maybe China, but I would wager they wont decarbonize completely.
Heavy3Heart@reddit
What's the point of being ultra efficient if we keep multiplying like cockroaches?
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
That claim smells like ecofascism. West birth rates are declining and we need lower population the most as we emit the most.
Heavy3Heart@reddit
There's 8 billion of us... I don't understand how everyone keeps complaining about capitalism and evil billionaires but will gladly spew their bullshit about birth rates because this time it suits them.
HommeMusical@reddit
Accept an upvote!
During WW2, when the UK introduced food rationing, childhood diseases from dietary deficiency went way down, because suddenly every child was getting a balanced meal.
If properly managed, I think the quality of life for a lot of people would go up. Yes, they couldn't get a 100" TV for less than $1000 anymore, but the upside would be a lot less work and insecurity.
autumn_rains@reddit
Yes, what we were able to accomplish with FDR and The New Deal and then during WW2 was phenomenal and we have so many more resources now. We absolutely could make it happen. And the jobs and systems it would create would help everyone thrive.
We need to farm locally as much as possible, stop shipping food around the nation and world. And by locally I mean it's not traveling more than a couple hundred miles. We have the technology to grant this in all climates.
We need a net-zero carbon economy, and this will require carbon capture technology. DT has done a lot of damage the last ten years because this technology isn't wide-spread from his denial tactics to enrich big oil.
Bandits101@reddit
Warming doesn’t stop if we “decarbonize”. GHG’s that are present in the atmosphere and increasing will remain until Earth’s carbon cycle removes them, and that takes tens of thousands of years.
There is much to happen (that is bad for life) before this new era of AGW plays out. The oceans are acidifying, warming, rising and dying. If you believe in miracles, that’s the only hope remaining.
GreenFalling@reddit
Monoculture farming at scale requires fossil fuels. Many human scale farms can farm productively, and using permaculture design can actually make them more resilient in the face of climate change.
IllBeGood3@reddit
The issue is stopping the global economy for this would be catastrophic for billions. Everything depends on oil.
This is our great filter and there's no way we're going to be able to get past it.
Minimumtyp@reddit
It doesn't have to. China is building the equivalent of 40 nuclear reactors worth of renewables a month. Sodium batteries are reaching parity with Lithium ones and BYD are building prototypes with sodium batteries. A lot of ships travelling worldwide are actually just carrying oil, so if we reduce the need for oil there's a sort of positive tipping point that further reduces the need for oil.
The collapse part is that we don't want to because of the ShArEhOlDeRs, there was capacity to do this years ago and the fossil fuel lobbies and existing frameworks are just too strong and deeply rooted.
peachtuba@reddit
You seem to be ignoring the plastic conundrum. Oil is not just used as fuel or to generate energy. The world as we know it collapses without single use plastics.
Minimumtyp@reddit
I'm not. Google says it accounts for 4 to 8 percent of oil usage (feel free to do further research - the point is it's negligible, and my understanding is it's sort of a byproduct of the refining process anyway) and we also have a lot of things that absolutely don't need single use plastics that we also choose not to because it's the cheapest and easiest option. Most of those single uses you mentioned, for instance, could be replaced with reusable packaging.
We are in a prison of our own creation.
peachtuba@reddit
That’s mostly correct except in the medical industry (pharma & biopharma).
Modern medicine stops when biopharmaceuticals can no longer be produced, and those Single-Use Assemblies used to produce biopharmaceuticals are only viable because of cheap single use plastics.
Minimumtyp@reddit
And we'd have more than enough for those important, less than a percentage materials if we reduced the 80% of oil being used for transport and electricity as well as the amount of plastic being used and thrown away for food and fast fashion.
peachtuba@reddit
Thanks for the civil discussion, you’ve made me reconsider my viewpoint.
Agreed that we’re screwed either way, but there’s also no point in representing things worse than they already are - and I think my viewpoint re. plastic and medicine was overly pessimistic.
HommeMusical@reddit
Such civility!! <3 <3 <3
No_Ear_1633@reddit
Ohh! The humanity!
Minimumtyp@reddit
Well I don't know what to do now, I came here for an argument. Thank you also, my viewpoint was also somewhat changed (never really considered medicine when it comes to plastic reduction, always almost entirely from a food and clothing perspective).
It's interesting that the most civil and intelligent discourse on this whole website seems to come from the subreddit where everyone has accepted defeat.
kansas_slim@reddit
Problem is infrastructure. It would take still take decades to transition just housing and transportation away from oil and that’s if the entire world decided to hold hands and cooperate immediately.
naniyotaka@reddit
China is ramping up coal... All they do is green washing, just like other nations.
waffledestroyer@reddit
Yeah it would seem there is no green transition, only a green addition. Not sure why you were downvoted. China is increasing both renewables and coal usage.
Spunge14@reddit
Depends how you define we. Maybe we'll seed life on other planets with some DNA base pair spaceships. Or AI on an ultra long distance space flight to the center of the universe.
danknerd@reddit
You won't know because you'll be dead. Sorry.
Spunge14@reddit
Not everything is about what you get to experience while you're alive.
RandomBoomer@reddit
Anything that happens beyond the point of your death is nothing but sheer speculation. Death means letting that go. The future belongs to the living.
Spunge14@reddit
I'm talking about the people who live on after you you fucking sociopath
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Hi, Spunge14. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/collapse for:
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
You can message the mods if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
ThirstyWolfSpider@reddit
The closest to good news is that the accessible fossil-fuel consumables will not be available to the post-large-mammal lifeforms, so they won't make those specific mistakes again. They'll also have rich surface metals and other recyclables, which might be nice. But beyond that it'll be a redo-from-start situation. Maybe the next round will do better than we did.
Runningoutofideas_81@reddit
This is one of the most hopeful and transcendent ideas I’ve seen in a while, thank you.
RandomBoomer@reddit
The very worst conditions that climate change will bring to the Earth will still leave it far more livable than any other plant. Meanwhile, long-term living in space is still a monumental challenge. Our bodies just don't work right without gravity and a host of other planetary forces that we can't even begin to meassure.
If we can't survive on Earth, we're done.
GreenFalling@reddit
Life will survive. Life as we know it, won't.
Of course humans will live on. We're colonized the world and are adaptable. However the world we grew up in is dying. The tropics will be uninhabitable. Heatwaves will kill millions, and displace even more.
But thinking it's easier to live in space is a fool's dream. It takes oil to get there too!
shwhjw@reddit
The sun will evaporate the oceans in 500m-1bn years so life doesn't have that many chances left to start over.
Bandits101@reddit
Intelligent life, especially Homo sapiens seems to be evolution on Earth and arguably the Universes’ proverbial one trick pony. Perhaps other humans that emerged alongside Homo sapiens could have evolved similar intelligence……. if they had survived, of that we will never know.
The coming comet strike of global warming, if it means extinction for all higher forms of life, then I’m afraid you are right, it will indeed be game over.
Malexice@reddit
The best you can do for yourself and your family longterm is having resources (mostly money) and knowledge.
HommeMusical@reddit
Reduce the consumption of the richest 1% by 99% and of the next richest 9% by 90%. Unfortunately, this 10% of the world controls the other 90% almost completely.
TheCrazedTank@reddit
That “Arc” will be filled with trust fund babies, 3 years until they kill themselves though incompetence.
Cultural-Answer-321@reddit
Galt's Gulch.
trickortreat89@reddit
Community, cooperation, networking, is the key…
seihz02@reddit
Giant underwater jet fans that push the water. I mean sky scraper sized ones. Nuclear powered, with reactors floating underneath the fans. We can do it. America A#1. Go us.
This is my plan.
Any day now I'll have the funds to do it. I promise. Trust me. Im the best. Buy my bitcoin it will help fund this amazing world's best underwater ultra fan.. AMOC will thank me when I'm done.. I'll be the best to AMOC, it will be all thanks to everyone that bought my coin, but really you know I will do this. And when I do this you will all tell AMOC to thank me.
Your welcome.
genomixx-redux@reddit
If something can be done it will be found in the struggle of the wretched of the Earth against the capitalist class
Aggravating-Break318@reddit
Some are sure trying with bunkers and shit
Jovan_Knight005@reddit
Might as well do after i graduate from college in a few months.
bannana@reddit
yep, I'll be dead by the time SHTF for real so fuck the planet, I don't give a shit anymore because y'all are fucked anyway.
xThomas@reddit
Not true. We will *checks notes * go to war with everybody
youtalkingtoyou@reddit
Time to start tapering off coffee, maybe.
Purua-@reddit
Yep I’m hoping to get a “career” job soon to spend money and doing things I love because I know it’s gonna end real soon
Mission_Reply_2326@reddit
The best way to be a loving parent is to not create any children.
BoringRedHorse@reddit
Would you say it is a coincidence that there is a human fertility collapse at the same time as a planetwide ecological collapse? Or could it be that the same system produces both, as both are treated as externalities to be ravaged and ruthlessly exploited?
Mission_Reply_2326@reddit
Ok first I just want to clarify fertility vs fecundity. When we are talking about populations, “fertility” doesn’t mean the ability to have children. Thats “fecundity.” When talking about populations “fertility” just means birth rate. I happen to have done population studies on wildlife so my thoughts on this are impacted by that. In working with wildlife populations, we look at what is the maximum population the ecosystem can handle- thats called the carrying capacity. When the population goes over carrying capacity, they absolutely devastate their ecosystem to the point where the carrying capacity of that ecosystem is permanently lowered for all intents and purposes- forever. An interesting thing that happens as a population approaches carrying capacity- homosexual activity increases. It’s almost like an evolutionary population control behavior wired into animals- humans included. Im 100% pro LGBTQ rights- but I don’t think it’s wrong to recognize that it is just as natural and purposeful behavior as heterosexual behavior. Obviously humans are more complex than animals so there’s more at play here. I think you hit the nail on the head that human fertility collapse is connected to ecological collapse- perhaps on small scales related to local ecosystems being unable to support their populations, but in more wealthy countries it would be due to people actually choosing to not want to have kids in such conditions. Like I said- who wants to have a baby, love it more than anything in the world, and know it will never have the same opportunities as you? Economics also play a role- as the wealth gap widens, less people can afford to have kids (but can still afford birth control- and this is why there is a movement among the wealthy to take away our birth control or to entice people to have kids- they need a working class to exploit but don’t want to redistribute wealth). I also suspect there is an actual fecundity issue too- with so many environmental pollutants, there is probably also a drop in individuals ability to reproduce. Finally- as sad as this is- I actually think tech advancements are reducing reproduction simply because young people aren’t dating as much. They are all looking at their phones and talking to AI and not having irresponsible sex. Basically- we are in a dystopian hell but some of us don’t realize it yet. But on the bright side, I love gay men and drag queens and having more of those is a silver lining!
BoringRedHorse@reddit
Please add some paragraphs for readability. I'm upvoting your comment because of its knowledgeable contribution but that wall of text made it look like I was in for wild crazy ramblings.
Mission_Reply_2326@reddit
I know I hit return when I wrote it!
Jovan_Knight005@reddit
I'm thinking about not having one, let alone marrying. I'm writing the comment as a man, of course.
BoringRedHorse@reddit
Don't worry, you wouldn't be able to financially afford them even if you did want to. That's another part of life that is being smothered by corporate greed right now.
Mission_Reply_2326@reddit
Vasectomies are a great option!
agiganticpanda@reddit
Best decision I've ever made. 😂
randomlyme@reddit
Corporate Boomers fucked us all.
SeVenMadRaBBits@reddit
The rich have built massive underground bunkers while ignoring climate change.
Now they're desperately building massive data centers for A.I.
My guess is they don't have a solution to climate change and either need A.I. to come up with one or to manage things on the surface with robotics while they hunker down.
Anyone else have any other ideas as go what's going on? Cause that's all I've got...
ansibleloop@reddit
And most of them don't have to live with the consequences
But their kids, grandkids and great grandkids do
They don't care about their own kids
No_Ear_1633@reddit
Faster than expected
SeVenMadRaBBits@reddit
Ocean current slowing down massively.
If ocean currents, particularly the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), stopped, it would trigger a catastrophic, irreversible climate crisis. Europe would freeze with temperatures dropping up to 20°C, sea levels on the U.S. East Coast would rise rapidly, the Amazon would suffer extreme drought, and global ecosystems would collapse.
Major Environmental and Global Consequences:
Profound European Cooling: The halt of heat transport from the tropics would cause severe cooling in Europe, creating winters so cold they could resemble an ice age. Rapid Sea Level Rise: Water would accumulate along the eastern seaboard of the United States, raising sea levels by up to half a meter.
Shifting Tropical Rain Belts: Dramatic shifts in tropical rains would lead to severe droughts in some regions (like the Amazon) and floods in others, disrupting agricultural production.
Severe Marine Ecosystem Disruption: Ocean life would suffer, as the nutrient transport that supports marine ecosystems would stop. Increased Storm Severity: Despite cooling in the north, tropical water would become warmer, intensifying hurricanes and creating more severe weather.
Why Currents Might Stop:
Ocean currents depend on a "conveyor belt" of sinking cold, salty water. Climate change-induced melting of polar ice introduces fresh water into the ocean, reducing its density and preventing the water from sinking, which can shut down the circulation. Recent studies suggest an AMOC collapse is a real possibility due to global warming, with a significant risk of occurring in the coming century.
autumn_rains@reddit
But the models last century said there would be whatever degree of warming by 2000 or whatever and it didn't happen so all models and research and data and evidence and bodies of support are WRONG. /s
MeepersToast@reddit
Here is the original scholarly article. Below is the abstract. I'm not seeing much to back up this posts claims. We're all worried about an AMOC collapse. But the article is more about simulating potential outcomes rather than quantifying whats happening now.
"The potential collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could profoundly impact regional and global climates, yet its effects on the carbon cycle and subsequently global temperature remain seriously underexplored. Here we quantify carbon cycle responses across different background global warming levels using a fast Earth system model. We find that Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse increases atmospheric carbon dioxide by 47–83 ppm carbon dioxide, leading to around 0.2 °C of additional global warming at higher carbon dioxide background levels after offsetting ocean-dynamics-driven cooling. Despite the modest global warming effect, regional temperature anomalies are pronounced: Arctic temperatures cool by \~ 7 °C (60 °N–90 °N), while Antarctic temperatures warm by \~ 6 °C (60 °S–90 °S). This latter response originates from deep convection triggered in the Southern Ocean, which ventilates deep carbon-rich waters. Such long-term equilibrium responses reveal key physical and carbon-cycle mechanisms and highlight substantial regional climate risks associated with an Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse."
Unlikely-Program-827@reddit
A decent amount of posts on this sub are claims with a linked article that’s saying something totally different
MeepersToast@reddit
It drives me nuts
If we don't fact check, this just becomes a sub for extremists and conspiracy theorists. What we should be is a group thinking rationally about a common concern
Sad_Syllabub_8014@reddit
Bunch of people with sad and bad lives who wish for the world to collapse so that they wont be the only miserable ones.
Thebigfreeman@reddit
i thought the mods were scientists and tough critics. nice infographics actually scare me away.
Uncommented-Code@reddit
If there is one thing I have learned over the years, it's to take this sub with a grain of salt and learn who the science-agnostic doomers are and who the actual quality contributers are.
It's one of the reasons I like Paul Beckwith so much for example. He's got a very basic presentation style but he's at least got education and goes through the actual papers and interprets them step by step so we can know his thought process. I can easily follow it and make up my own mind if I agree with him or not.
The stuff in the post not so much.
TernarySquare0123@reddit
It looks like blogspam but I believe the subtitle
and paragraph with the study link
were supposed to be supported by this from the results section
AccumulatedFilth@reddit
Who would've thought turning climate change into a profit model wouldn't change anything?
Dave37@reddit
No one read the actual scientific report i take it?
LunarN1ght@reddit
Honestly don't think so, to realize the actual effects. We've known this kind of shit for a while. IDT people realize it's gonna take a couple hundred years for the full effects to be noticeable.
kingtacticool@reddit
Well I just went down a rabbit hole and got some wildly bad news for yall.
Latest reading at Mouna Loa is 432.44 ppm
Last week's reading was 433.95
2024 set the record with a yearly increase of 3.5 ppm
We just saw a 1.5 ppm increase in 1 week
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/monthly.html
It'd be cool if someone could look at that graph and tell me im overreacting at this data. Like, really cool...
SubstanceStrong@reddit
I don’t think you can base it off of a week, that’s not accounting for naturally occurring fluxes.
trickortreat89@reddit
But it’s going really freaking fast… and once we’re higher than 600 ppm people literally start being unable to even concentrate. That’s when things will definitely also accelerate
NoExternal2732@reddit
You regularly breathe 600+ PPM of carbon dioxide indoors. It isn't a problem until it's at 1000 PPM, and even then its not a really bad problem until 2000 PPM.
Not saying that the increased CO2 isn't a problem, just that it's not an immediate problem...
trickortreat89@reddit
But having 600 PPM as the base load outside just means that especially inside it will be way above that… there’s been discussions about this exact problem in here before so it’s not just “nothing”. But I guess it’s really inconvenient for people to face this
NoExternal2732@reddit
You said that the inability to concentrate occurs at 600 PPM and that's just not true. It's dire enough without exaggeration.
ThirstyWolfSpider@reddit
Are you suggesting that people might, in the aggregate, be less able to make sensible decisions? (shock; gestures broadly at the current state of human cognition)
trickortreat89@reddit
Yes, I know it’s hard to imagine, but try to imagine how bad decisions we’re already making now, then just double that… scary stuff!
kingtacticool@reddit
This is five standard deviations (.26ppm) above the reading from two days earlier.
I've been staring at that site for the last half hour. This seems like a big deal.
Empty-Equipment9273@reddit
I think it’s due to the Hormuz closure and less airplane travel
Empty-Equipment9273@reddit
(Less sulphur masking)
AlfredoTheDark@reddit
Sulphur masking does not affect CO2 concentration.
Lady_Litreeo@reddit
How about the burning of oil depots in Iran?
Iron_Eagl@reddit
Look at any of the other, longer-term plots on that same page.
CorvidCorbeau@reddit
These measurements aren't exactly consistent. See those other big jumps from earlier this months? They are both larger than this new one
Cultural-Answer-321@reddit
What I see is the trend just going up.
kingtacticool@reddit
Im not seeing that. The May 1 readings are multiple instead of the single readings earlier in the month and the readings are much higher.
CorvidCorbeau@reddit
The ones I highlighted are gaps between daily averages. And you can see the horizontal distances between them are smaller, so those similar-sized jumps happened over a shorter time.
But if you don't trust this, then the only thing you can do is keep track of the data from the observatories, and see how it changes over the next week or so.
At this point, I wouldn't be alarmed, maybe in a few days we will be
kingtacticool@reddit
Thanks. Ill keep an eye on it.
gnostic_savage@reddit
I fully expected this. This is the time of year when the annual CO2 levels peak. We actually saw 434 ppm one day not too long ago. Most land is in the northern hemisphere, and it takes a while for the plant growth to start converting CO2 out of the atmosphere. It will drop back down during the summer and rise again next spring.
Next years we will see at least 437 ppm, or even possibly 438. We will surpass 440 the following year. If we rate of increase continues to increase, we will soon see 4 ppm per year, and possibly not long after that 5 ppm.
We just don't know, do we?
kingtacticool@reddit
The rate of increase is.....increasing. it was .94 in 1960, its 3.5 now. 25 years from now it could be 4 or even 4.5 a year
gnostic_savage@reddit
We'll reach 4 ppm much sooner than 25 years from now. We will likely see that within a decade at least one time, and maybe even next year, and maybe more than once.
I check the CO2 every day, and have for the past fifteen years. I'm familiar with the numbers. I use this site: https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2
Check out the bar graph on this page https://www.co2.earth/co2-records that shows the annual peak increase between 1999 and 1920. (I wish they'd update it.) We already saw an annual increase of 4 ppm from 2015 to 2016. Ironically, from 2017 to 2018 the annual peak actually dropped .20 ppm. I doubt we'll see a year like that again.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
You cant look at the readings week over week. But YoY is reasonable and the increases are crazy.
trickortreat89@reddit
How can people not start panicking whenever they see this…
Previous_Avocado6778@reddit
Ok great stuff. First watch this https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04?si=b82dNVqaeBlaHK6c
Then check out how during April and May the co2 emissions peak. The co2 is absorbed after May due to natural absorption of producers on the planet. It shouldn’t keep growing at this rate.
kingtacticool@reddit
Cool, thanks. I feel slightly less existential dread. Weeee.
Man_Flu@reddit
Am I getting it wrong? That's a 1.5 ppm decrease in the week.
kingtacticool@reddit
I got the numbers backwards when I was copying the data. I fixed it.
Man_Flu@reddit
Ahh haha fair righto. I reread your post a number of times and I'm tired, and I was like I need to read that again.
kingtacticool@reddit
Yeah, my bad. I was so excited when I wrote it i didn't double check before I smashed that post button.
Man_Flu@reddit
Excited about collapse. What a glorious time for us to be alive and to witness. Let's goooo
kingtacticool@reddit
I've been here a long time, long enough to see even my worst doomerish projections becone exceeded by reality.
I didn't think I'd live to see it with any meaningful life left. Now I know I will
WloveW@reddit
Look at the full record chart for co2.
That is what terrifies me.
Pap3rStreetSoapCo@reddit
According to the way you have stated it, it would be a decrease, or am I tripping?
kingtacticool@reddit
I mixed up the numbers. I've corrected it. Its correct in the link
fedfuzz1970@reddit
The number doesn't even include methane, nitrous oxide, etc. Add them together and you get....oh shit!
SwissChzMcGeez@reddit
Look at the annual chart and look how much it jumps around.
864586458645@reddit
Anything to own the libs.
ayeroxx@reddit
this is far beyond left vs right
ArmandSawCleaver@reddit
Biden signed the largest climate investment bill in history and Trump is literally paying Wind power companies billions of dollars to not build windmills but the response is “muh both sides”. Shit like this is why we deserve what we’re gonna get as a species.
summercookiess@reddit
Not all of us deserve it. Do innocent babies/children deserve it too? What about the global south?
FuckDaFerengi@reddit
Al Gore is also the reason why we are just now getting molten salt reactors and still don’t have breeder reactors. It’s not as “Dem vs Rep” as you are portraying. They both support the whims of Capitalism.
ArmandSawCleaver@reddit
More “both sides” bullshit when I literally just gave you concrete real world examples of the vast difference in action on climate between a democratic president and a republican president.
Appearing sufficiently anti-establishment by sprinkling erroneous criticisms of capitalism (as if the soviets didn’t drain the aral sea) gets you more cool boy points on the internet than acknowledging that Republicans are uniquely bad.
HommeMusical@reddit
You're a rude person, so let me tell you that your unsourced claims are bullshit and hopium.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2023/06/we-now-know-the-full-extent-of-obamas-disastrous-apathy-toward-the-climate-crisis
https://archive.thinkprogress.org/obamas-worst-speech-ever-we-ve-added-enough-new-oil-and-gas-pipeline-to-encircle-the-earth-e5e24a156910/
HommeMusical@reddit
If you mean the "Inflation Recovery Act", the individual states got to decide what they wanted to do with that, and most of them chose more roads for more cars.
Indeed, the "IRA" is a perfect example of why the Democrats' approach to the climate crisis will never succeed. If this money had been used systematically for public transport it could have revolutionized America. As it was, it changed nothing.
IfYouGotALonelyHeart@reddit
brother, Biden supported fracking, installing new pipelines, and was a huge proponent of the military industrial complex (the largest polluter of the world), get over this belief that neoliberalism would've prevented climate catastrophe.
IfYouGotALonelyHeart@reddit
lot of liberals (aka Republican-lite) in this sub. They're pretending like collapse is some brand new thing ushered in by Trump, as if we haven't been on a rapid decline since the Industrial Revolution, and like the military industrial complex (who uses up to 300,000 barrels a day just to operate) isn't a self-fulfilling eco-terrorist organization in the business of destroying the environment to enrich a few billionaire pedophiles.
Jovan_Knight005@reddit
Exactly, neither Republican or Democratic American Presidents barely did anything good for the world. For example, Bill Clinton's administration approved Operation Allied Force through the United States Senate, which was the carried out the United and eighteen European countries that are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for 78 days against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY).
Apart from civilian and infrastructural casualties, tens of thousands of tonnes of depleted uranium ammunition was dropped on military and civilian targets across the country (from Serbia and Kosovo and Metohija to Montenegro) as a result.
FuckDaFerengi@reddit
Is it though? Yeah, probably. Industrial civilization has its consequences.
ansibleloop@reddit
Yeah I know the right are burning everything down right now, but over the last 50 years the left has kept capitalism BAU rolling
The outcome is the same - just depends how fast and how hot you want it to come
Last election cycle the vote was "hot and fast and fuck us all in the ass"
keynoko@reddit
Only renting at this point. Maga can't afford owning rn
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
anything to rent the libs
Chart-Ordinary@reddit
It should get your attention when you realize that even scientists can’t always pinpoint when a major tipping point will occur.
freedcreativity@reddit
I mean humans are really really bad in general at exponents. If you put a bacteria that doubles every minute in a jar, how many minutes does it take to go from 25% to 100% full?
We’re at that point in the jar right now.
PatrolMan2129@reddit
>I mean humans are really really bad in general at exponents. If you put a bacteria that doubles every minute in a jar, how many minutes does it take to go from 25% to 100% full?
You need to add a line like "and it takes 1 hour to fill" for people to guess at that.
Ghostwoods@reddit
... no.
PatrolMan2129@reddit
Ah I see.
Ghostwoods@reddit
Nah, we're at the 90% full point.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
CollapseBot@reddit
Hi, you appear to be shadow banned by reddit. A shadow ban is a form of ban when reddit silently removes your content without your knowledge. Only reddit admins and moderators of the community you're commenting in can see the content, unless they manually approve it.
This is not a ban by r/collapse, and the mod team cannot help you reverse the ban. We recommend visiting r/ShadowBan to confirm you're banned and how to appeal.
We hope knowing this can help you.
This is a bot - responses and messages are not monitored. If it appears to be wrong, please modmail us.
Chart-Ordinary@reddit
That’s a good way to put it. The problem with exponential systems is they feel manageable right up until they’re not..
Chart-Ordinary@reddit
It’s funny how we get so stuck debating things like this. The reality is, we’re in trouble either way.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
Its hard to pinpoint tipping points in basically every earth system as the systems are so complicated and dynamic. Our situation is without precedent.
Chart-Ordinary@reddit
Exactly, and that’s what makes it more concerning. If we can’t reliably pinpoint tipping points because the system is so complex and unprecedented, that uncertainty isn’t reassuring, it’s a risk.
robotjyanai@reddit
My Japanese mother in law was just talking about how there are hardly any fish anymore where she lives, and whatever they catch doesn’t even taste as good as it did several years ago.
DrLeonardBonesMcCoy@reddit
Maybe if the Japanese stopped cutting the fins off sharks to make fuck'in soup might help ?
robotjyanai@reddit
This is not a thing where my mother in law is from, and not very common in Japan as a whole. Sure you’re not mixing Japan up with China?
DrLeonardBonesMcCoy@reddit
Ok. So you can not see a issue with over fishing. Killing sharks and whales for bizarre tastes. Ye fuck China too, they are probally worse but that does't make Japan any better. There's a reason why there's not as many fish and why does that do exist taste different. Stop fishing for God dam sake or don't expect anything to change.
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
robotjyanai@reddit
… I don’t fish nor eat fish, I just shared something my 80 year old mother in law brought up. Calm down dude.
DrLeonardBonesMcCoy@reddit
No you calm down dude. It's not a personal attack on you, you' might be cool for as far as I know and it's certertily not an attack on you're 80 year old MIL. It's about the Goverments of Nations who are disstroyiny a spec of a Planet in a vast Universe for greed. So as I said you calm down and at least admiit that the Japanese GOVERMENT and other GOVERMENTS are fuck'in up by over fishing and cruality to "farm animials".
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
JigglyBuisness@reddit
That funny feeling lol
absolutedesignz@reddit
"yes but you guys were so woke that's why we let the planet die"
They blamed everything else on wokeness. These agency-less MAGATs and others.
CICaesar@reddit
I'm as desensitized as the next r/collapse user, but can you believe we are actually killing off everyone. We're all gonna die, and so many animal species will also extinguish. I'm not even sad, I'm more aghast at the sheer stupidity of it all. And to remark on the stupidity, to get the point across we still have to resort to estimate what the economic impact will be, as if we as a society could not imagine what such an event could entail without somehow linking it to f*cking money.
Humans were always a shit species and I for one never thought highly of us as a whole. But we should've grown to be better than this at least.
monstaber@reddit
The very institutions and wealthy individuals driving the policy and industrial moves that directly lead to this ecological, societal, anthropological disaster, inevitably at some point also realized the course they were on. A prisoner's dilemma of greed..if I don't keep making more money, other people will anyway.
I believe the hugely accelerated change of approach of the mega wealthy in the last 10-15 years -- bankrolling caustic right wing politicians, destroying public policy, de facto bifurcation of society into the haves and have-nots a la Carlin's "big club", not to mention the push for AI that is now largely realized -- were steps taken after exiting the denial phase of the impending disaster, in the bargaining phase. The vast amount of humans not to mention ecology that will immensely suffer and perish as a result are simply part of the calculation.
The human condition of the 20th century dealt with industrialization, the Holocaust, equality, war and peace. The human condition in the 21st century is remarkably darker.
ZenApe@reddit
The only solace I have left is that I didn't bring a child into this world.
I don't blame my parents, they thought things were always getting better. But I'd be homicidal if I had kids right now.
Jovan_Knight005@reddit
I won't have children nor marry in the foreseeable future. I'm stating this as a man who is 21.
Ok_Main3273@reddit
There was never any proven case of a billionaire building a bunker in New Zealand. For starter, NZ is pretty strict when it comes to resource consents and building permits. Secondly, this place is so small ('two degrees of separation') that the news would go around pretty fast. Lastly, billionaires don't need to build any bunker at all, with NZ being a very stable country with low level of crimes. Simply purchase https://www.jamesedition.com/real_estate/queenstown-new-zealand/pinnacle-place-16394029 for example. Located in its own gated community within an Alpine resort town, that is a much easier and way more discrete option than trying to build a bunker.
And no, those photos are not A.I. generated: this is really the view from that house!
Jovan_Knight005@reddit
I often regret being born for the last three weeks for some of the reasons that you've mentioned, but there's not much that i can do about it.
No_Foundation16@reddit
401K? Hahahaha!
HommeMusical@reddit
Currently, global GDP is around $85 trillion, so this doesn't really make sense.
Slovak_Eagle@reddit
Honestly? At this point it can´t all come crashing down soon enough. I´m tired, boss. Now I just want to watch the world burn while I look at people telling "I told you so" to them all while their lives burn away in the fires they ignored.
vinegar@reddit
Can we stop with the “35C is lethal” bullshit? This is the 2nd time I’ve seen it this week. Wet bulb cannot be reduced to a single number. Hard labor in 35C is a regular occurrence for half the planet for all of human history. The situation is bad enough without promoting misinformation. We’re going to keep hearing about temperatures up into the 40s and 50s for the rest of our lives, let’s understand how humidity determines how dangerous they are. At 50C with very low humidity, you’re still in the green on the wet bulb chart. (And at 35C with high humidity you’re a goner.)
RainbowandHoneybee@reddit
But isn't that what the article is saying? It says high sea temp drives humid heatwave. They are not talking about any 35 c, 35c with increased humidity which causes wetbulb?
jbond23@reddit
Could you please edit this to make it clear which temperatures you're quoting are air temp and which are wet bulb temp?
I think, "Hard labor in 35C Wet Bulb" is not a regular occurrence. 35C wet bulb temperatures are happening now but they're very rare. There's been occasional instances in southern Iran and bits of pre-monsoon India.
onlydaathisreal@reddit
I have a meme for this! I have this saved at the end of my camera roll with the date of January 1st, 2060. I guess i will have to update it to 2040 now.
PsudoGravity@reddit
Omg lmk when something actually happens
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Hi, PsudoGravity. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/collapse for:
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
You can message the mods if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
-Germanicus-@reddit
It's basically already happening, it just takes some time to feel the full effects.
BitchfulThinking@reddit
One truly selfish, parasitic land species destroyed the OCEANS for countless other lifeforms, on a shared planet...
Stop making more parasites.
Green-Collection-968@reddit
Maga and the Cons are already blaming Black ppl for the wild fires. They're saying Black Lives Matter is running around burning everything down.
darweth@reddit
I still think Earth can make a comeback with a stable climate in millions/hundreds of millions of years. This post is fear mongering and very human and current animal and other species biased. May something new arise in our place! Or I don't know... dinosaurs are still around. They're called birds. Maybe we will be plagued with some sort of human survival that really will ensure earth never provides an easily livable habitat again. Sad.
Allergic2thesun@reddit
The goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 is just the threshold for everything in the future to stay the same as it is now. If we pass this threshold, the actual climate changes will take place across millennia.
There will be droughts and sea level rise will destroy coastal cities, climate zones will shift 1500 km north over the course of several hundred years or so, but we can gradually switch from cultivation to pastoralism and pasture-raising, and we'll have more than enough time to migrate to more habitable cities.
We're not going to become a runaway greenhouse planet like Venus nor is this anything like the Permian-Triassic mass extinction in the next 100 years.
TheJewBakka@reddit
A Day After Tomorrow could quite possibly happen a day after tomorrow. Insane.
devadander23@reddit
350ppm wasn’t a suggestion. Don’t pretend to be surprised that the expected consequences have arrived
choppy75@reddit
I think I'm going to put "350 ppm wasn't a suggestion" on a t-shirt
TheCrazedTank@reddit
Again, the only models governments will acknowledge are those showing the “Best Case Scenarios”. Things are never “worse than expected” because actual experts have been ringing the alarm non-stop for decades.
They’ve just gone ignored…
Key_Pace_2496@reddit
Just fucking get it over with already...
Me-Shell94@reddit
It’s so horrible….. I’m ashamed.
nothankeww@reddit
🔥 🐶 🎢
this is fine
PrideOfEverblight@reddit
As I sit here reading this on my porch, sip a corona and watch my daughter bomb up and down the sidewalk on her scooter, how incredibly depressing this is. So much potential. Gone and for what? Greed. Stupid ass apes. Fuck humanity. Sorry and good luck to what remains.
kingfofthepoors@reddit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNYp6oc37ds
KatyLouStu@reddit
One correction on slide 6/9 regarding human physiology in the presence of wet bulb phenomenon: the temperature at which the thermometer bursts in the graphic should be 31°C. "But in their new study, the researchers found that the actual maximum wet-bulb temperature is lower — about 31°C wet-bulb or 87°F at 100% humidity — even for young, healthy subjects. The temperature for older populations, who are more vulnerable to heat, is likely even lower." Source
Obligatory: faster than expected, Venus by Tuesday
ChromaticStrike@reddit
UNOSAY?