The most important yet misunderstood concept in climate science - Tim Lenton
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 06. 2024
- 📺This channel is 100% independent. Please consider helping us here: fr.tipeee.com/circular-metabo...
There is an essential and yet poorly understood concept in climate science: tipping points.
Several climate tipping points (such as the ice loss in Greenland and Antarctica or the slowdown of the Atlantic circulation) are dangerously close and run the risk of triggering a "tipping cascade".
To understand these risks and know how to keep us in a safe space through positive tipping points, we are talking with Professor Tim Lenton.
Tim Lenton is Chair in Climate Change and Earth System Science at the University of Exeter.
🔷 CHAPTERS
00:00 Introduction
05:33 The Earth system
11:18 Vital signs of the system
15:28 Tipping points
29:00 Irreversibility
32:34 Civilizational tipping points
35:08 Early warning signals
38:31 Socio-ecological tipping points
44:19 Positive tipping points
🔷 REFERENCES
Recommended books:
• Gaia, a new look at life on earth (1979) James Lovelock
• The Ages of Gaia (1988), James Lovelock
Scientific articles:
• Lenton's tipping points article (paywall): www.nature.com/articles/d4158...
• Planetary boundaries: www.stockholmresilience.org/r...
• Social tipping points (the "25% rule"): pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29880...
🔷 MAIN TAKEAWAYS
• Map of the tipping elements (HD): i.ibb.co/DbKqshq/elements.png
2 main views:
• Object (thing) perspective: seeing the system's elements as static and well defined (better spatial accuracy, worse temporal fidelity)
• Process perspective: seeing the system's elements as changing and interconnected (better temporal fidelity, worse spatial accuracy)
Types of feedback loops:
• Damping feedback (provides stability)
• Amplifying feedback (creates possible instability)
Types of cycles:
• Real cycles made of material flows
• Causal cycles made of causal chains between events
Tipping point:
• Threshold of an amplifying feedback loop beyond which change becomes self-propelling
• Happen when the damping feedbacks get weaker than the amplifying feedbacks (variability increases)
🎤 Interview: Aristide Athanassiadis
🎞️ Editing: codexprod.fr
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
🔷 LINKS
👀 CZcams: • The most important yet...
💌 Newsletter: www.circularmetabolism.com/
👂 iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/be/podcast...
👂 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/13qH9Oj...
🙏 Tipeee: fr.tipeee.com/circular-metabo...
Tim Lenton seems like an earnest fellow but he is in denial. The vital signs are…not good to say the least and Lenton is akin to a pathologist conducting an autopsy more than anything else.
“I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”
- Sultan Al Jaber, President of COP 28, also CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
Mukhtar Babayev will be the president for COP 29; he is also a former executive of the State Oil Company of Azerbaijian Republic.
Seems more and more likely, scenario SSP5-8.5 of the IPCC assessment may come to fruition (or at least the higher end of the spectrum). I say enjoy what you can, while you still can; pity the generations to come.
Yep
Does anyone think Professor Tim has considered the finite nature of resources? It is becoming increasingly complex and expensive to obtain lithium, cobalt, and rare earth minerals necessary to produce electric vehicles. While this is true for all manufacturing, not just EVs, it will mean the green transition will not go as planned. Dr Simon Michaux frequently talks about this.
I think he has considered this, yes. He mentions EVs aren't perfect but are much better than ICEs. IMHO people who often mention this point very often massively underestimate just how much mining the the fossil fuel energy system relies on, how inefficient it is (the majority of the energy is lost as heat etc), and how e.g. 40% of all shipping is moving fossil fuels around.
He has. I wouldn't own a private vehicle except for a bike.
Yes the materials are a problem. They pale in comparison to the processes and lifecycle of flammable fossils. We're going through 100 billion barrels of oil equivalent fossil fuels energy annually. Spewing 51 billion tons of greenhouse gases pollution into our globally shared atmosphere annually. Millions of abandoned wells and mines are leaking millions of tons of methane. Germany's brown coal mines destroyed hundreds of villages tens of thousands of acres. West Virginia coal has removed hundreds of mountain tops ruining thousands of streams, fouling the land. Outside of batteries Cobalt's primary use is to remove sulfur from petrol. In US alone 600-700 combustion vehicles catch fire every single day. 5,000 petrol stations catching fire annually. Dozens of refinery fires pipeline leaks annually. Pick your poison. IMO at the very least electrify everything possible and stop burning hydrocarbons. Lastly there's no Fossil Fuels Fairy refilling the holes! Methane is critical for the production of fertilizer. There's no way to feed 8 billion precious humans without this stuff yet we're burning it for transportation and electricity. Foolish short sighted ENERGY BLIND. We're going through the hydrocarbons of our children and the countless billions yet to enjoy our incredible and only home Earth.
It was in the first 10 seconds of the video: self-preservation. What do you think motivates Tim?
I highly recommend the great simplification by Nate Hagens
So the written version of this content is in a paper in a paywalled journal somewhere?
I need it in an actual book and I need it on my shelf.
Next question: when all this is done, what will the atmospheric CO2 peak at?
The atmospheric peak will depend on what humans will do. So it's unpredictable.
Merci pour la qualité des sous-titres en français !
Tim Lenton makes a really good book called "Earth Sister Science"
When he mentioned thousands of years (for ice sheet melt), he just took himself out of relevance to most people on this planet. Sure, London is a Roman city, but that's just nostalgia. What matters in many countries is how far away is the next election, or the next corporate quarterly report.
Malheureusement vrai. La plupart des citoyens de ce monde ne peuvent réellement penser dans un temps éloigné. Mais, i' y en qui le peuvent. Ceux-là ne sont pas vraiment écoutés...
Du coup, la question se pose sur notre capacité en tant qu'espèce à gagner en lucidité. Et choisi réellement le changement de paradigme.
Ça va se jouer à l'échelle locale. Partout dans le monde. Sauf, probablement pour certaines guerres à venir...
Il n'y a jamais eu de fin de l'histoire. Si cela veut réellement dire quelque chose...
La fin de l'histoire pour une espèce n'a qu'une seule définition. Ce qui arrivera, pour nous, de toutes façons.
La question du coup est; qu'elle fin allons nous choisir?
Mais faut revenir au début de mon com... Peut-on vraiment choisir en tant qu'espèce ? Probablement pas.
Et donc, c'est dans le local que réside un futur possible. Des futurs possibles.
Ceux qui ont peu de la démondialisation ont tort. Nous avons toujours troqué avec nos voisins. Même très éloigné. Seul le temps des échanges étaient différents. Demain, il y aura toujours des échanges, des partages etc. Mais à une échelle de temps respectueuse. La bonne échelle de temps.
Par contre, l'entre deux, jusqu'à ce temps retrouvé, ça va faire mal...
Pas sûr que mon com soit d'un quelconque intérêt ! ^^
Or the next famine
@@christophechatelain5611 Excelente comentario. ¡De acuerdo! Saludos desde Bolivia.
No one is talking about natural cycles of the earth.
No one is talking about the sun's activity and how it affects the earth and the planets. It's all about human activity... just a thought, but people haven't thought that governments/groups have been hoodwinking us and not telling people the truth and other theories about climate change.
Natural cycles of Earth used to take millennias to kick in. What we see now is a runway self-fueling abrupt climate change, which will be caused by climate feedback effects triggered by people
Nobody talks about these natural cycles all that much because they have been studied to death and determined that they are not a factor in this current warming trend. Get it? They have been extensively studied - and they are not causing any noticeable of significant trend right now. So they are irrelevant. These natural cycles (Milankovitch and solar) are well known - easily modelled - and not a current serious driver - of anything. Usually when something is already proven irrelevant by both empirical data and excellent modelling we can safely discount it. Do you understand this?
alright, well you go to the sun and tell it our situation and how drastically its changing [meanwhile the sun has maintained the same cycles and it's only our part of the solar system radically changing]and it can figure it out for us. we'll strap you on a rocket that's loaded with pollutants that otherwise wouldn't be in the air, send you out there, maybe you could visit the other planets afterwards; then maybe y'all can form a group of some sort, and get back to us while our 'natural cycles' come to a halt on a planet that we whoopsie daisy'd into plastic, cracked cement where the plants were once growing, water that's too salty/anoxic , and polluted ecosystems where we killed most of the things that used to live in it..
i dont think you realize that buzzwords like natural cycles and solar activity dont give a fuck about our needs, it's up to us to make our lives livable, and we equally have the power to make it unlivable.
Merci !
A great interview with Tim Lenton, thanks both for stimulating questions and thoughtful responses. I particularly value Tim's point of tieing it back to the rise of 'capitalism', I think that exactly hits the nail on the head. Just a rider that underlies everything discussed here is that James Hanson and others consider 10º Centigrade is already in the pipeline. With that sort of possibility the rise in sea levels won't be 10 metres, it will be 60 metres over some amount of centuries when the East Antarctic ice sheet is considered. 10 metres could quite conceivably happen within two centuries. Let's not be too beholden or perhaps a better phrase is 'led down the garden path' by the IPCC that corporate beholden body. Define net zero?! By 2050... planet Earth we're in trouble!
"Horizon temporel éthique !"
Best phrase de l'entretien ! Ça devrait etre le moteur de toutes nos actions ! Tout le reste de l'entretien est excellent!
Poor guy
@@alejandroluer y a un problème ??
@@alejandroluer t'as envie de développer ? Tu as des arguments à faire valoir ? Des propos intelligibles à poser?
Un sujet très lié, mais dont personne ne parle
La ponérologie politique (Andrew Lobaczewski)
La fiche de lecture de Michel Drac est excellent et se trouve sur youtube.
C'est aussi connu sous le nom de «Pathocratie» ou comment la psychopathie a pris le contrôle de nos sociétés.
@@alejandroluer allo!!
Great interview
You aren't supposed to use "tipping points" anymore, it makes people anxious. The new phrase is "amplifying reversible feed backs".
Oh, please!
.. and irreversible, anyway.
Very strange comment
@@johnbamforth more idiot, I thought.
The politically correct phraseology once again pollutes the airwaves of gobble de gook discourse…
all of these half steps will eventually lead to Dr Guy Mcpherson's conclusion from 14 years ago. He is still the only one putting all of the information into the equation.
Maybe but unfortunately Guy Mcpherson (1) Lies hugely about 2 important published papers (2) Is totally clueless about even the simplest thermodynamics (bit of a serious knowledge gap when the topic is Global Warming). He thinks Earth HAS NO OCEAN. Earth DOES have an ocean, it isn't bone dry all over its surface. LOL
La transition est d’abord culturelle et basée sur la transmigration
great podcast !! congrats
Thanks so much!
The sooner there’s a worldwide population crash the better if there’s any hope whatsoever of escaping extinction. The same amount of suffering is going to occur whether soon or in 2040. My money is on like 80% mortality by 2030 and that won’t be rock bottom.
We’re in the early stages already, and we have far too much momentum to make any meaningful change.
I think as soon as you started to balance yourself on a chair , you have started tipping point, unless your dad give you a clip behind the ears 😂 , you are in deny until the end .
So , we have passed tipping points .
I don't really understand the professor fussiness in saying, well that's it , we'll see where its going to lead us now and in the future.
I have to disagree on his view of "renewable energy" as it's all made of metals. Metals are not renewable, we don't recycle them because we can't. We also need fuel to power huge machines to extract them, as they become more rare. Batteries are not renewable, they're ultra toxic and non-recyclable, same for solar panels. Wind power won't matter as an energy system as it's unreliable.
It's all a lie to decarbonate richs countries while the poor providers of these resources destroy and pollute their soil in irriversible ways.
I don't have a solution, but I don't seek relief in false hopes. If human kind wants to survive long term, we'll need to cut our population to a small proportion of what it's today. We have to think of how do we do that.
We don't have the technologies to support 8 or 10 billions humans and we won't have them before it's too late.
Your response is deeply flawed in the area of decarbonization of wealthy countries.
I have to say that a wealthy country is possible without fuel.
But 1/3 of population will have to work on fields and garden fruits forests.
Half of the population isn't emitting much at all.
Without the poorer 4 billion, nothing would be gained.
Metals are highly recyclable materials. In fact, recycling metals is not only feasible but also economically and environmentally beneficial. Recycling metals reduces the need for new mining, conserves natural resources, saves energy, and minimizes pollution. Many metals, such as aluminum, steel, and copper, are commonly recycled worldwide. So I would push back against your refrain here. As for the requirement to reduce our numbers, I am in agreement.
Si seulement la culture animiste amérindienne n'avait pas disparut, nous pourrions nous en inspirer. Alors peut être que nous n'en serions pas là.
Depuis 10 ans maintenant je vois que les propositions politiques dites patriotiques sont bien plus en accord avec les questions de soutenabilité que l'universalisme.
En effet l'universalisme des lumières est dans son mode de développement extensif totalement épuratoire, mondialiste et dogmatique.
Grosso modo pour faire simple et caricatural, l'écologie, c'est de la droite des valeurs. Pendant ce temps la gauche l'utilise pour véhiculer d'autres idéaux qui sont eux sociétaux.
J'espère qu'un jour cela va changer car une gauche des valeurs écologique mondialiste implique forcément un ordre et une gouvernance mondiale. Or cela n'est pas au goût de tous.
On ne débats pas des goûts et des valeurs. On débat des idées, des solutions, du partage des richesses, des contrats, mais JAMAIS de l'Ethos. C'est impossible.
Et donc ma conclusion de néophyte est que la guerre mondiale est la seule issue à ce type de conflit tant que ce qui est mis en avant est l'idéal sociétal occidental.
Finalement, l'écologie ainsi que notre survie en tant que civilisation est reléguée au second plan.
Was it not the native americans who first landed in north America 25 000 years ago who probably hunted mastodons and mammoths to extinction?
Remember earth will not die, present living creatures will extinct
The worst ecological catastrophe in the geological record was caused by a population that dumped their waste products into the atmosphere without thinking about what would happen next.
In their defence, cyanobacteria weren't able to think. We *can* think, so why aren't we learning from the past?
Can't these guys talk without using their hands?
Selling fear always sounds clever.
Not when fear is being brandished out of tfg’s mouth. 🤦♀️🤡🤬
I missed the product placement in this video. Can you reply with the time point where you saw something for sale?
Doctor tim seems a little bit high. Is he high on hopium?
The permafrost “thaw” TRANSFORMATION is a NEW enormous carbon SINK . As the permafrost thaws the vast subarctic region greens producing a vast natural plant based CO2 absorbing plant carbon sink that will remain long after all the gases have been released. So the subarctic permafrost region is transforming into an enormous natural green carbon sink for now and will continue long into the next century.
Dr Schuur's research has shown that is not the case:
"Monitoring the ecosystem C balance of the tundra near Eight Mile Lake has revealed that that this landscape acted as a net carbon source from 2008-2013. Photosynthesis by plants in the growing season did not offset the year round metabolic respiration by plants and soils in five of the six years studied. As a result, the carbon storing capacity of this landscape was reduced from 2008 to 2013: 276.25 g of C was lost from each m2 of tundra. This C was previously stored in tundra plants and soils was released to the atmosphere in the form of CO2."
@@harveytheparaglidingchaser7039 This study doesn’t address the transformation of the tundra and permafrost to the greener and thawed soil . In the near future once all the frozen soils have thawed and released the stored gasses the subarctic region will be a net carbon sink BECAUSE ALL THE STORED GASSES HAVE BEEN RELEASED.
The article you references does not even address the transformation of the tundra and the new vegetation and plants that will replace the tundra so it’s completely irrelevant.
On "short" term,30 years or so, methaan is 28 times me effective in trapping heat than is CO2. So them very slow growing Arctic forests that are going to replace permafrost, would have to be nearly 30 times as effective in retaining carbon, only to balance for methane lost to the atmosphere.
And, Arctic winters are _Cold_
Even if they are warming, The Arctic climate is anywhere from the fertile climates of temperate zones. Besides, if them forests would be so productive, mankind would be quick to harvest that timber. For that reason, profitability of forest stands, trees are utter useless as a climate "remedy".
@@reuireuiop0 not timber but natural grasses and shrubs , there’s already been an ongoing grassland development in Russia showing how well certain long grasses are thriving and providing an expanding natural habitat for wildlife. The grasses being used have been developed to store more carbon with expanded roots systems .
The final conclusion is that the subarctic permafrost region IS TRANSFORMING TO BE AN ENORMOUS NEW CARBON SINK PLAINS LAND THAT WILL BE DRAWING DOWN CARBON FROM NOW AND CONTINUE FOR THE NEXT CENTURY .
@@reuireuiop0 "On a 100-year timescale, methane has 28 times greater global warming potential than carbon dioxide and is 84 times more potent on a 20-year timescale."
Everybody thinks their getting paid for saying Tipping point, these are Preachers saying pay me to represent this Cult.
Tipping points. More lucrative fear mogering.
It's far more lucrative to sell fossil fuels. Or even, build nuclear power plants funded by buns tax payer money
Joseph Fourier is the biggest fear monger since Fourier published science two hundred years ago stating, "the effects of human industry" will heat up Earth! There - I hope you are too scared now by two hundred years of fear mongering!
@@reuireuiop0What alternatives would you propose?
@@aliendroneservices6621 Wasn't about alternatives. Hunter implied scientists and renewable energy producers make money out of fear for global heating. But Fossil Industries are among the richest enterprises in the world, and them are the guys making money out of climate destruction, billions more than the average science institute ever gets budget for. Nonsense argument
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 Fourier was right, and as a result sea level has risen four inches since 1993, and its rate of rise has doubled, according to NASA and the World Meteorological Organization. Can you project forward 25 or 50 years to see what the increasing rate of rise will do to our coastal infrastructure? In January, Maine suffered a record high tide that caused $100 million in damages. Ironically, Maine is uplifting land from glacial rebound. It's the last state that should be suffering such a fate.
Go south to Louisiana and add subsiding land to the equation and you have double the rate of relative sea level rise, which is why that it has has lost over 8700 acres to indundation since 1985, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. It's why they have $50 billion in new flood mitigation projects in the works. It's worse in Odisha state in India, where they've lost 28% of their coastline to seawater encroachment.
BS!
The world is not warming . In fact it is getting colder as exemplified by the coldest , heaviest snow blizzards occuring in Feb & March 2024 in Mongolia & North China which froze to death 9 million livestock . And is why cattle prices hit an all time record high in Feb & March on the CME. Proof that the world is getting much much colder.