{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@tfardet Yes, if we do what was promised by governments the warming would likely be more than 3°C.

I am personally not expecting that humanity will stay below 2°C with additional action. (And without solar radiation management.)

But the 1.5°C limit seems to have helped people realize the problem is urgent and has focused their attention more to the problem. Rather than the opposite, which the letter somehow claims.

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin
Tanguy Fardet

@VictorVenema
Ok I think I understand.
I think it's a misunderstanding: for me the letter says that 1.5 was a good thing 7 years ago but saying we will respect it today makes people think current and even promised actions are sufficient.
This would enable companies and government carry on insufficient actions while saying they'll manage.
It is to fight against that that several governments were sued for climate inaction.

1
2y
Replies