Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday October 09 2018, @06:26PM   Printer-friendly
from the hot-stuff dept.

It's the final call, say scientists, the most extensive warning yet on the risks of rising global temperatures.

Their dramatic report on keeping that rise under 1.5 degrees C says the world is now completely off track, heading instead towards 3C.

Keeping to the preferred target of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels will mean "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society".

[...] After three years of research and a week of haggling between scientists and government officials at a meeting in South Korea, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued a special report on the impact of global warming of 1.5C.

The critical 33-page Summary for Policymakers certainly bears the hallmarks of difficult negotiations between climate researchers determined to stick to what their studies have shown and political representatives more concerned with economies and living standards.

Despite the inevitable compromises, there are some key messages that come through loud and clear.

"The first is that limiting warming to 1.5C brings a lot of benefits compared with limiting it to two degrees. It really reduces the impacts of climate change in very important ways," said Prof Jim Skea, who co-chairs the IPCC.

"The second is the unprecedented nature of the changes that are required if we are to limit warming to 1.5C - changes to energy systems, changes to the way we manage land, changes to the way we move around with transportation."

"Scientists might want to write in capital letters, 'ACT NOW, IDIOTS,' but they need to say that with facts and numbers," said Kaisa Kosonen, of Greenpeace, who was an observer at the negotiations. "And they have."

The researchers have used these facts and numbers to paint a picture of the world with a dangerous fever, caused by humans. We used to think if we could keep warming below two degrees this century, then the changes we would experience would be manageable.

Not any more. This new study says that going past 1.5C is dicing with the planet's liveability. And the 1.5C temperature "guard rail" could be exceeded in just 12 years, in 2030.

We can stay below it - but it will require urgent, large-scale changes from governments and individuals and we will have to invest a massive pile of cash every year, about 2.5% of global gross domestic product (GDP), the value of all goods and services produced, for two decades.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 09 2018, @10:06PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 09 2018, @10:06PM (#746659)

    That is because you are easily wowed and have zero concept about the limitations behind *our* video games. To simulate a universe where the people inside can verify "physical reality" with a variety of experiments would be insanely hard. It goes way beyond just simulating reality at the Large Hadron Collider. You are trying to say it is possible, and no one yet has said it isn't.

    Just not practical. Why invest all the money and effort into simulating reality? Why do it without the inhabitant's knowledge? Probably easier to dump a bunch of humanoids on a planet. So again, sure it may be possible but it is so ridiculous and impractical that it makes no sense. Why bother wasting your energy on the idea? Give the idea a spin, enjoy the mental games, then let it go unless it somehow becomes more relevant.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday October 10 2018, @02:45AM

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday October 10 2018, @02:45AM (#746782) Homepage Journal

    I'll say it's not possible then. The data storage requirements would be physically prohibitive. You would need less matter to actually make this universe than to store every particle in it's state.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by toddestan on Wednesday October 10 2018, @03:36AM (1 child)

    by toddestan (4982) on Wednesday October 10 2018, @03:36AM (#746800)

    The thing with a simulation is that while simulating our universe within our universe seems impossible, we don't know anything about the universe that's running the simulation. It could be that other universe operates under entirely different physics, making things possible that would impossible in our universe, and in comparison our universe is actually very simple and thus easy to simulate. And we'd have no idea because this universe is all we know.

    To use the video game analogy, the video game characters would only know the in-game universe, and wouldn't know anything about the universe that's running their simulation (game) and what's possible in our universe. For example, to run a simulation you'd need a computer - a CPU, some kind of storage, and something like electricity to make it go. I don't know any game engines that support the physics do something like that at any kind of scale, and such concepts would be completely alien to the characters in the game. Even for game engines where an intelligent in-game character could create a very rudimentary computer such as Minecraft, said character might realize that theoretically one could build a computer to run Minecraft out of redstone in their universe, but would logically conclude that would be completely impractical to do so and thus "impossible".

    That's not to say I believe that our universe is a simulation, but like trying to prove there's no God, there's really no way to completely disprove it.

    • (Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Wednesday October 10 2018, @05:39PM

      by fyngyrz (6567) on Wednesday October 10 2018, @05:39PM (#747052) Journal

      we don't know anything about the universe that's running the simulation.

      IOW, it's all made-up nonsense. No science, no evidence, nothing. Pretty much just like any other religion. That was my point.