Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB - View Single Post

Captain Snooze · 07-25-2021, 06:33 AM

"Global warming below 1.7°C is ‘not plausible’, reveals our study of the social drivers of decarbonisation
We took a new approach to the study of climate futures, one that goes beyond previous efforts by the IPCC, the International Energy Agency and others, which assessed futures that are merely possible or feasible. “Possible” simply describes an accordance with natural laws, while “feasible” means that there are no or few barriers to a particular future. For example, it is technologically and economically feasible (and clearly possible) that you sell your car and buy a bike. Bikes are a mature technology and cheaper to maintain than cars. But will you? It’s also feasible that 20% of the UK becomes vegetarian by next year. But will they?

Plausible, on the other hand, means that something has more than an outside chance of occurring – it has an appreciable probability. In the context of climate futures, this means that a scenario is not merely feasible, but also that there is enough societal momentum and political will to make that future materialise.
There is no hard, quantitative limit for “appreciable” probability or “enough” political will. But our assessment didn’t need to split hairs in this way.The evidence was overwhelming.

Though the 1.5°C target might be possible, there are currently no grounds for optimism that we will meet it. But perhaps our findings will provide exactly the motivation we need to make it happen."

Article
Study

07-25-2021, 06:33 AM	#428
Captain Snooze Because compromise ® Join Date: Jan 2012 Drives: Red Herring Location: australia Posts: 7,817 Thanks: 4,047 Thanked 9,548 Times in 4,194 Posts Mentioned: 60 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	"Global warming below 1.7°C is ‘not plausible’, reveals our study of the social drivers of decarbonisation We took a new approach to the study of climate futures, one that goes beyond previous efforts by the IPCC, the International Energy Agency and others, which assessed futures that are merely possible or feasible. “Possible” simply describes an accordance with natural laws, while “feasible” means that there are no or few barriers to a particular future. For example, it is technologically and economically feasible (and clearly possible) that you sell your car and buy a bike. Bikes are a mature technology and cheaper to maintain than cars. But will you? It’s also feasible that 20% of the UK becomes vegetarian by next year. But will they? Plausible, on the other hand, means that something has more than an outside chance of occurring – it has an appreciable probability. In the context of climate futures, this means that a scenario is not merely feasible, but also that there is enough societal momentum and political will to make that future materialise. There is no hard, quantitative limit for “appreciable” probability or “enough” political will. But our assessment didn’t need to split hairs in this way.The evidence was overwhelming. Though the 1.5°C target might be possible, there are currently no grounds for optimism that we will meet it. But perhaps our findings will provide exactly the motivation we need to make it happen." Article Study __________________ My car is completely stock except for all the mods.