Discussion · bonfire.cafe

In short, once clean techs are in the money and the world starts going down the path of decarbonization, change won't be linear.

It never is.

Even the least ambitious Shell scenario reaches near-zero emissions by 2100(!)

@gwagner@fediscience.org replied · last week

Compare that to this collection of paths, pulling from IPCC, IEA, and Shell(!).

Forget the title for now and zero in on the paths.

There's IPCC SSP3-7.0 — NYT says that one won't happen. Good.

But more importantly, look at *all* the others, including Shell's most pessimistic.

@gwagner@fediscience.org replied · last week

In short, once clean techs are in the money and the world starts going down the path of decarbonization, change won't be linear.

It never is.

Even the least ambitious Shell scenario reaches near-zero emissions by 2100(!)

@gwagner@fediscience.org replied · last week

The NYT supports as much: "EVs are now normal."

Yup.

@gwagner@fediscience.org replied · last week

There's clearly some bad news here, too.

But, for example, natural gas won't be ascendant for much longer, or stay there through the end of the century.

The forces driving down climate tech costs are just too strong.

Argue with exponential growth at your peril.

bonfire.cafe

A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate

Bonfire social · 1.0.0 no JS en

Automatic federation enabled