Exclusive: Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds

Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds

Hundreds of the world’s leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) this century, blasting past internationally agreed targets and causing catastrophic consequences for humanity and the planet, an exclusive Guardian survey has revealed.

Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating above preindustrial levels, while almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit will be met.

Many of the scientists envisage a “semi-dystopian” future, with famines, conflicts and mass migration, driven by heatwaves, wildfires, floods and storms of an intensity and frequency far beyond those that have already struck.

Numerous experts said they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided.

      • Organichedgehog@lemmy.world
        15·
        7 months ago

        A) at any tree nursery

        B) these machines actually exist, and throwing money at them would no doubt expedite the process of making them a viable solution

        • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          7 months ago

          Havent tree charities been planting billions or something? Is co2 reducing yet?

          Get me a link to buy one of these machines

              • Organichedgehog@lemmy.world
                7·
                7 months ago

                Someone else in this thread is giving you the exact answers you’re looking for, and you’re sidestepping. Just like you sidestepped that trees are literal carbon dioxide removing machines.

                Not to mention throwing money at corporations to develop cleaner manufacturing would also answer your original question.

                You’re not here to debate in good faith, you’re a pesky little troll. Go away

                • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  7 months ago

                  no I directly responded about the trees. They’re nice, they’re not very effective. Like I said, planting trees isnt a novel suggestion, it’s actively happening, a lot of money is being spent on it and a lot of trees are being planted. It’s not moving the atmospheric co2 needle at all.

                  cleaner manufacturing is way too vague. manufacturers arent just making waste for the hell of it, it’s already in their interests to manufacture as cleanly as possible. You’d have to point out specific processes that need to be changed or removed.

                  • Organichedgehog@lemmy.world
                    7·
                    7 months ago

                    This shit is so easy to Google, you’re not here to argue in good faith.

                    15 billion trees are cut down per year, 5 billion are planted.

                    cleaner manufacturing is way too vague

                    Bro just stop. You think it’s impossible to make global manufacturing more eco-friendly? Do I have to break down the exact step-by-step minutiae of every step to reducing CO2? are you mentally capable of inferring that there ARE solutions if you throw a fuckload of cash at it?

                    I mean, for fucks sake, there’s a comment below involving Polyol that demolishes your argument. You’ve completely ignored that comment and came back here to be insanely pedantic.