Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #RCP85
Most recents (3)
Con gusto. New links to observe how the Arctic sea ice (#BOE) and Greenland ice sheet (#GIS) export fresh cold water to the Atlantic. How long until the AMOC tips and shuts down, accelerating warming and sea level rise?
earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean…
Hansen 2016 acp.copernicus.org/articles/16/37…
earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean…
Hansen 2016 acp.copernicus.org/articles/16/37…
Monsoons. Note what mental contortions the authors perform under the absurd @Peters_Glen @hausfath @MLiebreich crusade against #RCP85. Have we stopped this nonsense yet? egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022…
@climate_ice, is GIS subglacial methane cycling accelerating? pulse.ghgsat.com/?lat=68.66&lng…
@climate_ice, is GIS subglacial methane cycling accelerating? pulse.ghgsat.com/?lat=68.66&lng…
@Peters_Glen @hausfath @MLiebreich @climate_ice This really isn't hard. Please focus and do science that matters if you can. We need your support.
The frustrating thing about the #RCP85 discussion is how many still refer to RCP8.5 as “Business-As-Usual”.
RCP8.5 results from assuming "no climate policy" in a "fossil fuel intensive" scenario.
There are many other no climate policy baselines, all lower than RCP8.5...
1/
RCP8.5 results from assuming "no climate policy" in a "fossil fuel intensive" scenario.
There are many other no climate policy baselines, all lower than RCP8.5...
1/
The whole problem is that RCP8.5 has been incorrectly interpreted as BAU (& no one did anything about it)...
It is not correct to say "we were on RCP8.5, now we are on RCPx.x", as we will never know if we were on RCP8.5. Maybe we were on a RCP4.5?
2/
It is not correct to say "we were on RCP8.5, now we are on RCPx.x", as we will never know if we were on RCP8.5. Maybe we were on a RCP4.5?
2/
Scenarios are constantly updated to be consistent with recent trends. What scenario are we following now? 🤔
You can play with all the latest scenario data from the SSP database... tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb/dsd?Acti…
3/3
You can play with all the latest scenario data from the SSP database... tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb/dsd?Acti…
3/3
Who thinks climate impacts in a 3-5°C world are zero? ...or a 1°C world (today)?
This is what the SSPs assume, by design.
To believe #RCP85 you need
* World that prioritises fossil fuels
* Zero climate policy to 2100
* Zero climate impacts to 2100
1/
link.springer.com/article/10.100…
This is what the SSPs assume, by design.
To believe #RCP85 you need
* World that prioritises fossil fuels
* Zero climate policy to 2100
* Zero climate impacts to 2100
1/
link.springer.com/article/10.100…
The same is true for low-mitigation pathways, even when climate policy is assumed.
RCP1.9 or RCP2.6 (1.5°C or 2°C) generally use loads of Bioenergy with CCS, but it is assumed that a 2°C world has no climate impacts on that bioenergy (or food & agriculture, or forestry).
2/
RCP1.9 or RCP2.6 (1.5°C or 2°C) generally use loads of Bioenergy with CCS, but it is assumed that a 2°C world has no climate impacts on that bioenergy (or food & agriculture, or forestry).
2/
This is a methodological design choice. The SSPs are meant to be 'modular' & have climate policies & climate impacts added.
In practice, mitigation pathways don't consider feedbacks from climate impacts (in the vast majority of studies).
3/
In practice, mitigation pathways don't consider feedbacks from climate impacts (in the vast majority of studies).
3/
