The IPCC's latest assessment on climate change - what does it tell us?
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 08. 2024
- On 9 August 2021, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its 7-yearly assessment on the state of our climate. This report focuses on the physical science of climate change, covering temperature changes, weather patterns, sea level rise, and the Earth’s carbon budget. IPCC reports are the world’s most authoritative sources of climate science, approved by 195 countries.
So what does the report tell us we can expect from our climate in coming years? What changes have we experienced so far and what are the latest projections around the future frequency and intensity of extreme events, rising temperatures and rainfall and water availability?
In this event, we hear from leading Australian and international climate scientists who have contributed to writing this report.
0:00 Welcome by Moderator: Prof Mark Howden, Institute for Climate, Energy & Disaster Solutions, ANU; Vice-Chair, Working Group II, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
2:52 Opening statement: H.E. Vicki Treadell CMG MVO, British High Commissioner to Australia
12:58 Dr Jan Fuglestvedt, Vice-Chair, Working Group I, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
38:56 Dr Pep Canadell, Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO Climate Science Centre; CLA, Working Group I, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
1:07:28 Discussion and Q&A
This event was co-hosted by the British High Commission to Australia, and the Australian National University Institute for Climate, Energy & Disaster Solutions.
We need more money to buy future technology. Technology is the answer? I thought it was the problem.
It is both.
Technology allows for 8 billion people. we can only move forward with technology. otherwise. its back to 1 (or less) billion people. And that will be a tough life boat to get on.
Why? Why do we assume that a reduction in population will lead to mass misery? Billions of us are miserable right now.
Depends on the technology; eg. replacing fossil fuel with non-carbon emitting energy sources. Change to a vegetarian diet was suggested by one of the climatologist experts; live healthier and longer too.
@@SuperTonyony Getting from 8 billion to 1 billion...that process will be miserable. Many will have to die and likely many will be painful deaths, it won't be some natural death from old age. At the end its possible we can live in balance with 1 billion, sure. But even then the whole logic is a bit strange. The problem is not technology today, it is just that we don't distribute wealth and food evenly. The problem is not that we have too many humans today, it is simply that we did not move to cleaner technologies faster. So nothing requires population control, or a reduction to one billion in the first place. It simply requires that we manage our resources and our politics better, which is obviously easier said than done. But so long as it remains unfixed, then getting to 1 billion will just reset the problem rather than fix anything, and we will rapidly balloon back to where we are today.
Unless we see some dramatic revolution in politics and social standards we will have to augment the human genome to force people to become smarter, more understanding, and so on to permanently stop voters from voting for leaders like Trump.
Unfortunately we have been captured by corporate capitalism. Greed has triumphed. Our governments now only do the bidding of corporations who now have infiltrated their apologists into every key organisation. (Money in politics for example disenfranchises us all). The law now represents their interests through their gold plated lawyers. See how corporations have received the status as "human" with a twist: All the rights with none of the responsibilities. Financiers commit a myriad of offences and never do worse than a fine. Ditto with corporations, whose misdeeds amount to murder, at scale. (particularly the pharma giants). The wiping out of flora and fauna by "Agribusiness" with their array of poisons that now pervade large parts of the biosphere, and have destroyed vast acreages of the soil which have turned into CO2 emitters, carry on unchecked and encouraged (feeding the masses cheaply despite the growing realisation that traditional farming without chemicals using nature to put the right plants together to gain yields etc.etc is as, or more productive without it's attendant destruction) Sadly today it is our "Industrialised,Modern Technological, Anti-Nature civilisation" with it's immensely powerful forces with it's Giant monopolistic corporations calling the shots on a global scale. Until we tackle that inbalance we do not stand a chance to have any future. Money is NOT the answer.
There’s a silver lining in this. They’ll, the corporations, will die with us.
It's already over.
Well said
Great presentation - thank you !! What happens when we start getting blue ocean events in the ARCTIC which are predicted at 1.5C? What is the radiative forcing from the reduced albedo and the myriad positive feed backs that would result? Why doesn't the IPCC consider these events? Why are there sooo few comments so far?
because they all have the head up their ass
I've heard from other sources that we are tracking the worst case scenario, but these guys don't seem to be concerned that that's the case.
IPCC is aware of feedbacks, it's silly to think otherwise. Many of the feedbacks don't have complete information or with the data that's available are difficult to model accurately, so they are left out. You can see them mentioned however, and it's one of the reasons why 1.5 is such a stressed for limit.
@@aprilbl00m long story short we are completely fucked things are worse than people realize and things are changing faster than everyone thought
@@Badassmcawsome009 we passed 1.5 long time ago we just havnt fully felt the affects of it yet, wait till we do have a blue ocean event like the other commenter said, thats when things are going to get out of control.
Great talk. Lots to absorb. The difference in predictions for fossil fuel investment is stark and demonstrates the extremist position currently in the Australian government.
You didn't seriously believe the hogwash the British lady was spouting at the beginning did you?
@@kyletopfer7818 Paris is not enough, nature based solutions sounds great but I am a evidence based decision maker. She is different from myself but we need the full variety of skills and personalities for the climate emergency.
@@nottenvironmental6208 I was more referring to the factual manipulation coming out of the Johnson government in the UK.
This may be a dumb question, but, what is the percentage of reduction, that shows the interruption of current practices and methods of obtaining water, the first big issue, or any other function we think will reverse the warming? Where is this working and what else can be used to stop the warming as a for sure method. In other words, if we go green across the world as much as we can, what is the proof that the climate change will reverse its self? Good presentation, and Thank You for your efforts. We need millions of people like you to make a positive impact in the world.
Please carry on reducing all harmful emissions into the atmosphere. But can we all agree that the Geoenginerring as an attempt to reduce global warming is a complete debacle of the greatest magnitude. If we are to stop the weather anomalies, we must stop Geoenginerring.
I'll bet the farm that you have children and are not vegan.
Thanks for sugar coating the current crisis and giving people false hope. It's entertaining how people can talk over the heads of people describing that the house is burning down.
Co2 and greenhouse gases in the world's atmosphere is not causing increase in temperature or climate change . Other factors are causing it .
I know, right? I'm thinking 2040 to 2060 at the latest before catastrophe.
Fire conditions, weather extremes, fraught and Arctic melting are very similar now to what they were in the 1940s. Recent history demonstrates that places on earth have experienced up to 200 year droughts in long term cycles eclipsing conditions we are seeing right now. Please learn your history and stop this madness.
You need to tell the politicians these things as if you told them to little children. They do not understand the severity in a couple of degrees warming. This must have been very well proven by now.
I agree 100% IMO The scientific community has let humanity down. They are not 'responsible' but they did humanity little service. Sad.
So to avoid the "estimated" , computer generated and fudged numbers , just come up to Canada and park yourself in the latitudes where the temperature range you will feel cool enough , for the remainder of your days .Bring winter clothing .Open your eyes !
@@Treeroot2 Oh really? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Western_North_America_heat_wave
SMH. Keep the head buried. That way the truth does not matter.
On one hand...
politicians generally think no further ahead than the next election cycle...they won't do something unpopular NOW to benefit the planet 25 years hence...
On the other hand...
should a nation's leader, in grasping the nettle & actually doing that something NOW, be voted out & replaced by someone who immediately withdraws support for whatever measures were put in place...
@@ravenken In what way have "the scientific community let humanity down"...?
This needs to be repackaged for the masses in a more interesting eye catching or we are f*cked
lol. we already are. 100 years. done... if not sooner
@@RK-ip9zp try 2050
@@robertcohen8554 I was trying to stay optimistic. lol . But I think you are right.
@@RK-ip9zp unfortunately, ecosystems will collapse suddenly at one point in the near future...without warning. Just like someone who ignores their heart disease, suddenly has a heart attack and collapses dead.
@@robertcohen8554 people arent accounting for crop failures theyve listen to to much news and rising sea water
... as a German Biologist - as a Scientist - all those efforts are a waste of resources. Nothing will ever “change” as it is a MONEEEY driven global Society. Anything we propose to Change NOW - is very expensive and takes comforts and expectations away.
nice
Most data is pulled starting in 1960s or 1970s which is at the end of a cooling period caused by sun cycles. The very best place to demonstrate a false warming period.
How many of the 14,000 publications are biased to climate alarmist view? Answer: nearly all of them because you could not get funding if your research counters anthropogenic global warming.
Save Our Planet
Can we estimate how long before the world will become inhabitable. I'm 73, but I have a daughter 46, & a precious grandson is 18. It's personal for everyone.
When the Arctic goes icefree in the coming years
Apparently we are on track to hit 1.5oC of warming around 2028. That only leaves 7 years :(
And why did your daughter have children? I KNEW what was happening and did the ethical choice to not have any chdren...I'm now 51 and k ew this for decades.
@@Jc-ms5vv They have been talking about ice free Arctic in summer coming soon for the last 35 years. Yet its no where near Ice Free . If this global warming happening , its happening at a glacial slow pace. Maybe 500 or so years it might be Ice Free in the summer.
@@patrickball2493 you should do some actual research. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. We're pumping CO2 into the atmosphere 10 times faster than the petm extinction . What's the worst that could happen?
Here's a video that might help you get a better understanding
czcams.com/video/ByA9PzZ9b3Q/video.html
Another five years, after 2022 does seem possible, but I wouldn't count on it..., the Oceans are warming up to quickly..., the world fires too numerous...
Data proves we've never been safer, healthier or more prosperous than at any time in history. This, even after 200 years of climate change and 42 years of climate hysteria.
As I watch all of these assessments/breakdowns/talks etc all the way back to as early as 2016 the same theme emerges, lots of hope and commitment but nothing ever changes all the charts keep going one way. Also we are talking about society ending things here and you are wasting time talking about gender and traditional land owners, im sorry but that is a instant turn off for most new parties interested get on with it.