Post

Avatar
Avatar
I am frankly puzzled by the comment attributed to the lead author because it’s clear this analysis is talking about earth systems sensitivity — which we have always known is likely twice what we commonly refer to as climate sensitivity and what future projections reflect. ???
Read "Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts over Decades to Millennia" at NAP.edunap.nationalacademies.org Read chapter 6 Beyond the Next Few Centuries: Emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels have ushered in a new epoch where human activit...
Avatar
Avatar
Tagging @retoknutti.bsky.social as being the author of a metaanalysis of climate sensitivity studies, he’s sure to have the answer at the tip of his fingers
Avatar
I don't understand your comment ("which we have always known") - you're not saying the global temperature projections are too low by half, and we know about it but don't recalculate, right? Not sure what the difference between climate and earth systems sensitivity is, and I guess that's the issue 😅
Avatar
I figured most people wouldn’t be, so that’s exactly why I included the link in my comment. It is the best explanation of earth system sensitivity I have read, by expert Ray Pierrehumbert.
Avatar
I have not read the study. But I did read the news article and my guess is that they’re measuring an Earth System Sensitivity rather than what we normally call climate sensitivity. ESS contains factors not included in climate sensitivity. This could explain why they’re getting higher numbers.