>>13339848No. Mostly because a lot of that carbon is in the oceans. If you took all atmospheric carbon out things would not “return to normal” after a few years. Other effects like the changes in albedo and land use still have an enormous effect on global climate. The good news (or not depending on how you look at it) is that the IPCC working group 1 confidence for changes in natural disasters like wildfires, crop failures, typhoons, etc. is very low. They know almost certainly the earth will get hotter in certain areas, but it’s the difference between the Carolinas and New York, not the North Pole and a volcano. People in the third world may~ be fucked, but it depends more on economic development and political stability than it does on the actual climate. Don’t get me wrong, some regions are expected to change a lot, like desertification is northern sub Saharan Africa, but if they can develop to look more like Saudi Arabia instead of shithole Burkina Faso and buy their food, rather than farm it at the subsistence level, they will be fine. Again, this depends on economic development more than if the dry season is a month longer and the temperature is 4-7F hotter at the peak. Now, something to note is that if we keep pumping ghg into the air, the certainty of even higher temperatures will rise a lot. In my opinion as a former working energy analyst, the best thing we can do about climate change is take some measured, common sense cutbacks that don’t fuck our economies, while heavily encouraging the third world to develop economically.
t. actually read the full IPCC report (outdated one though)
I’m by no means an expert on statistical dynamics though, so maybe some scientist (or more likely armchair scientist here) can give an answer with concrete numbers.
