You're missing... time. Like us all. The required transition requires time. But the kind of transition you mention is by far too slow to stop climate dereliction and loss of biodiversity.
In 2025, the amount of greenhouses emitted will get the world in the following years to +1.5ºC (when compared to 1750, before the industrialization).
We are already experiencing the effects of the climate dereliction, despite being around +1.25ºC (I'd need to chech that figure). Australia's current unknown floods will be followed by a summer of fires and temperature above 50ºC. The drought in the USA is alarming etc etc.
To avoid reaching +2ºC, the world would need the multiply the current transition trend by a factor... 33.
Above +2ºC, the climate will enter into self-reinforcing effects. The Amazon forest is on the verge of becoming an savanna: such a very large forest produce its own rain. By mid-april 2022, a larger surface of Amazon forest has been burnt than during 2021, the previous highest record.
The Covid and Putin's revolting invasion of Ukraine is masking a fundamental trend: the agricultural yields are already falling almost everywhere because of climate dereliction (about 20% less the recent years). That is the true reason for the huge inflation of food prices.
We just don't have the time for that kind of slow transition in the hope that some wonderful technical breakthrough will save us all.
I'm not the one saying that: just read the 111 page of the sum-up of the IPCC reports just published. Thousands of scientists have participated. Their climate model is now well tuned. The previous reports proved to be already reliable, and even by far too optimistic.
If you believe in Science, then you can't stay in the delusion that we are doing anything near what is necessary to tackle the issue.
Believing that Science and Technology will somehow provide the breakthroughs soon enough to stay under +2ºC is at best a convenient wishful thinking, but more likely magical thinking.
Why? Because the whole subject has been worked on by thousands of scientists in the past 40 years. One can not believe in Science only when it fits one's way of life.
"The future is already here, but not evenly distributed": The solutions exist. It has been shown that their costs to the world economic growth is far cheaper than the current quasi-inaction.
If we invest massively, we are quite capable of handling it. We don't need any breakthroughs. I'm optimistic that some will occur if we focus.
But the whole thing is classic game theory situation: everybody wins if everybody cooperates, but each country will be better off doing nothing while the others pay the cost of transition.
So we do nothing. At least nothing near the acceleration by a factor 33.
Don't trust me. Read the IPCC 111 pages and make your own opinion.
Sorry for the gloomy post. I can't help myself believing in Science.
> the agricultural yields are already falling almost everywhere because of climate dereliction
Sorry, but that's not necessarily true. Photosynthesis intensity increases with elevated CO2 [1] and decreases with higher temperatures. The exact effect of higher yields from more CO2, lower yields from temperatures, and increased arable land area from higher temperatures is not well known.
Agricultural yields depend on many more factors than just CO2 and temperature.
There's been a lot more extreme weather events - case in point : australia (recently floods - a lot of them, and the long term drought for over a decade). I'm sure similar stories could be seen in other parts of the world.
Yields are factually decreasing. As just mentioned, because natural disasters are broader, more intense and more frequent as the result of climate warming; that's why I pay attention to say "climate dereliction that the IPCC scientists prefer to "climate warming".
Furthermore, our pollution (plastic, pesticide s, fertilizers, synthetic materials of all kinds, oil spills, etc etc) is destroying the fertile soils, depleting them from its biodiversity. The ratio living creatures of all sizes per ounce of soil is decreasing. Intensive agriculture of cereals for example with Monsanto seeds and pesticides leads to a 80% loss of " life" inside the soil.
To make that worse, the climate warming destroys biodiversity because it rises far too fast for the Nature to adapt. A forest can move one meter per year in direction of the climate best adapted: the seeds on the less adapted climate die but the seeds on the better side grow. The natural climate cycles varies by a few degrees per 10 000 years (in a global average). The human impact will soon have risen the average temperature of 2ºC in 200 years.
Otherwise, yes, the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is making the forests rise faster in many places. But it is far from compensating the emissions. And the huge fires in Australia, USA and Siberia, plus the going Amazon forest ecocide have emitted an immense tonnage of CO2.
In 2025, the amount of greenhouses emitted will get the world in the following years to +1.5ºC (when compared to 1750, before the industrialization).
We are already experiencing the effects of the climate dereliction, despite being around +1.25ºC (I'd need to chech that figure). Australia's current unknown floods will be followed by a summer of fires and temperature above 50ºC. The drought in the USA is alarming etc etc.
To avoid reaching +2ºC, the world would need the multiply the current transition trend by a factor... 33.
Above +2ºC, the climate will enter into self-reinforcing effects. The Amazon forest is on the verge of becoming an savanna: such a very large forest produce its own rain. By mid-april 2022, a larger surface of Amazon forest has been burnt than during 2021, the previous highest record.
The Covid and Putin's revolting invasion of Ukraine is masking a fundamental trend: the agricultural yields are already falling almost everywhere because of climate dereliction (about 20% less the recent years). That is the true reason for the huge inflation of food prices.
We just don't have the time for that kind of slow transition in the hope that some wonderful technical breakthrough will save us all.
I'm not the one saying that: just read the 111 page of the sum-up of the IPCC reports just published. Thousands of scientists have participated. Their climate model is now well tuned. The previous reports proved to be already reliable, and even by far too optimistic.
If you believe in Science, then you can't stay in the delusion that we are doing anything near what is necessary to tackle the issue.
Believing that Science and Technology will somehow provide the breakthroughs soon enough to stay under +2ºC is at best a convenient wishful thinking, but more likely magical thinking.
Why? Because the whole subject has been worked on by thousands of scientists in the past 40 years. One can not believe in Science only when it fits one's way of life.
"The future is already here, but not evenly distributed": The solutions exist. It has been shown that their costs to the world economic growth is far cheaper than the current quasi-inaction.
If we invest massively, we are quite capable of handling it. We don't need any breakthroughs. I'm optimistic that some will occur if we focus.
But the whole thing is classic game theory situation: everybody wins if everybody cooperates, but each country will be better off doing nothing while the others pay the cost of transition.
So we do nothing. At least nothing near the acceleration by a factor 33.
Don't trust me. Read the IPCC 111 pages and make your own opinion.
Sorry for the gloomy post. I can't help myself believing in Science.