https://phys.org/news/2025-11-full-earth-simulation-tool-climate.html
Climate change is responsible for more extreme hurricanes, more destructive wildfires, severe droughts, and increased human disease, among other harmful outcomes. Experts warn that if carbon emissions are not significantly reduced within a few decades, the damage to Earth's ecosystem will be irreversible.
Among the most effective tools scientists have developed to understand climate change are digital simulations of Earth. These simulations are produced by developing specific algorithms to run on the world's most powerful supercomputers. But simulating how human activity influences the climate has been an extraordinarily difficult challenge.
A mind-boggling number of variables need to be taken into consideration—such as the cycles of water, energy, and carbon, how those factors relate to each other, and how diverse physical, biological, and chemical processes interact over space and time. For these reasons, previous state-of-the-art simulations have not been able to achieve what is referred to as a "Full Earth System" simulation.
The Gordon Bell Climate Prize-winning team reached a landmark this year by being the first team ever to develop a Full Earth Simulation at 1 km (extremely high) Resolution. In their introduction, they explain, "We present the first-ever global simulation of the full Earth system at 1.25 km grid spacing, achieving highest time compression with an unseen number of degrees of freedom.
"Our model captures the flow of energy, water, and carbon through key components of the Earth system: atmosphere, ocean, and land. To achieve this landmark simulation, the team harnessed the power of 8192 GPUs on Alps and 4096 GPUs on JUPITER, two of the world's largest GH200 superchip installations."
The innovations the team employed to make the Full Earth Simulation possible include: exploiting functional parallelism by efficiently mapping components to specialized heterogeneous systems and simplifying the implementation and optimization of an important component by separating its implementation in Fortran from the optimization details of the target architecture.
In the conclusion to their paper they write, "This has enormous and enduring potential to provide full global Earth system information on local scales about the implications of future warming for both people and eco-systems, information that otherwise would not exist."
More information: Daniel Klocke et al, Computing the Full Earth System at 1km Resolution [OPEN], Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (2025). DOI: 10.1145/3712285.3771789
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday November 24, @01:16PM (14 children)
The main problem with climate change is not that it hasn't been studied precisely enough to understand what's going on, but that those with the power to make policy don't like the conclusions and have thus decided for the most part decided to solve that problem by pretending that the conclusions aren't true. And that will continue to be the case even as the evidence for the general correctness of the idea piles up, and also will continue to be the case as the models become more and more precise.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 1, Touché) by khallow on Monday November 24, @01:29PM (8 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @04:53PM
SOP, standard operating procedure, or more accurate, stupid on purpose.
(Score: 4, Touché) by PiMuNu on Monday November 24, @07:49PM (3 children)
I get your point, but I don't see how it could be any other way.
A: "There is a huge asteroid pointing at earth"
B: "Better figure out a way to stop the asteroid"
A: "You are just telling me to do that to line your own pockets through corruption"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @12:42AM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday November 25, @08:46AM (1 child)
> those with the power to make policy have also been funding climate research
My point is, who do you expect to fund climate research if not the folks who are tasked with deciding whether to fix it and implementing a fix if required?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @11:08AM
Thexalon's argument dismisses a faction of society. That argument similarly can be used to dismiss the faction that support climate research as well. I consider it a straw man argument that can be used against anyone rather than a productive argument.
As for me, I consider it similar bad faith to ignore changes in research that go against one's narrative as I do the outright refusal to look at research and then declare it false. For example of the former, Roger Pielke Jr. (a long term critic of climate research) notes [substack.com] that scientific predictions of warming by the end of century has gone from a prediction of over 4C warming to a little under 3C. Given that we've already experienced over 1.2C of that warming, that's crudely almost a halving of warming over the next 75 years. But we're still getting the same dire predictions as if nothing had changed.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 24, @08:28PM (2 children)
That the ones that sponsored climate studies are guilty of what those study discovered, right? Right?
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Touché) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @12:40AM (1 child)
Easily transforms to:
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @02:01AM
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @05:37PM (2 children)
The real problem is with the people who do believe it's true; but behave in contrary ways. I caught on quick with the Kyoto Protocol. I said to somebody at the time, "This isn't about stopping global warming, it's about holding the West back so China can get ahead". Sure enough, China poured more concrete than you can shake a stick at, and did a bunch of other things under that protocol. Concrete production, BTW, is a major emitter.
They had an opportunity, a blank slate there. China was full of bicycles when it decided to switch to a hybrid command/market economy. They chose particulates and cars, then trains which are better, but they're approaching US levels of emission. They could have found a better way to do this. Maybe go straight to trains? I dunno; but none of this was really taken seriously.
The "climate credit" thing. What a joke. That system got totally gamed, in highly predictable ways.
The fact that they're all FLYING to these conferences gets a lot of attention. It illustrates the hypocrisy, but it isn't the biggest problem.
Be the change you want to see. You eat the bugs first. Own nothing and if you're happy, we'll come around.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Thexalon on Monday November 24, @07:09PM
The people flying into conferences aren't behaving like it's a real problem, at all. As far as they are all concerned, if the idea exists it's Somebody Else's Problem, so it might as well not exist.
Greta Thunberg can lecture them all she wants and it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. They don't care. They don't have to care.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday November 26, @01:36PM
"The fact that they're all FLYING to these conferences gets a lot of attention."
Wait, it gets even better! They clear cut a large swatch of virgin Amazon rainforest to build a highway to get to this year's COP 30 climate conference.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9vy191rgn1o [bbc.com]
https://www.newsweek.com/amazon-rainforest-climate-summit-highway-2043496 [newsweek.com]
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/amazon-rainforest-chopped-down-to-build-highway-for-conference-on-climate-change/ar-AA1ALPK2 [msn.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 24, @08:26PM (1 child)
See also climate doomers [google.com]
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @01:04AM
That's a common problem of attempting to convince people via extreme emotion to do your thing. They easily get derailed by that emotion.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by progo on Monday November 24, @03:45PM (1 child)
Is this the first time someone used that term?
Or do we suddenly have behavior laws for all the things about Earth we previously didn't understand? The core? The mantle? Oceanic abyss ecosystems? Particles of life floating around in the upper atmosphere? How trees communicate?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 25, @01:06AM
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Tuesday November 25, @08:16PM
"Climate change is responsible for more extreme hurricanes, more destructive wildfires, severe droughts, and increased human disease, among other harmful outcomes. Experts warn that if carbon emissions are not significantly reduced within a few decades, the damage to Earth's ecosystem will be irreversible."
I can't believe it's almost 2026 and you're are still pushing this bullshit. Every part of that paragraph is demonstrably false. Even Bill Gates finally admits there is no tipping point and sky is not falling.
Nope. The globalist have moved on from trying to bankrupt Western nations by "fighting climate change" to trying to bankrupt the Western nations with a gigantic AI bubble. Please, pay attention!