They didn't have to agree like that - afaik, there is a default procedure that without host-region consensus COP goes to Bonn (location of UNFCCC secretariat). So did EU agree internally to Bulgaria's giving up - maybe related Azeri gas? Did P's flying visit to AbuDhabi twist some arms?
benjhm
joined 2 years ago
Re transmission - yes there are increasing losses - but the OP is about cheap panels, so cheap electricity.
It doesn't have to go so far, for example I'm thinking that the population in the Sahel is projected to increase a lot - that highest fertility in the world, as these regions develop they'll need electricity.
As for your non-forest, I'd call that scrubland, certainly not desert - which implies to me sand or bare stones, deserted by almost all life not just by people. Of course flowers can bloom even in the desert on occasional years after rains. Indeed the whole Sahara was much greener, only a few thousand years ago, and maybe could be again if we could work out the secret. But that's still a perturbation, and even with solar panels, there'd be plenty space left.
It’s kinda trivial to show that impacts at 2ºC are much worse than at 1.5ºC. What nobody has done is shown that the difference between 1.6ºC and 1.5ºC is so much more than between 1.5ºC and 1.4ºC, and therefore that this is the key threshold at which we must stop /panic /revolt /give-up-and-party /whatever ... What matters is the curvature of the function, to see curvature you need at least three points within the range of choice (acc to Paris 1.5-2.0). So more info about impacts at 1.75ºC could help. I told them this during scenario planning discussions over a decade ago, but the big earth-system-model guys just mumbled about "signal-to-noise-ratio" - they preferred to run RCP8.5 (the extreme high scenario that - fortunately- is looking so implausible it may be dropped from next IPCC round), because the higher the scenario, the more exciting graphics they make, the more funding they get..., but this didn't help to show why we need more effort from all, at the bottom of the range.
Anybody know, how was Bulgaria persuaded to give up trying for COP29 ?
If there was no agreement within E.Europe group, it would have gone back to Bonn by default (which is hardly good for Russia).
Chongqing looks fun. Not only modern cities multi-level - Edinburgh old town also fun, old stone castle-like buildings, ±12 floors one side for 4 on the other, as it straddles an old volcano (does lack north-south transit).
I'm not "old", just feel that too late to radically change direction with a new identity, so better to accept (and tell) how this life evolved (and in this context, makes it easier to link to website etc.) Could make another anonymous account if necessary for some radical project.
I respect that younger people may stay anonymous to experiment with different phases of life. After a certain age we've had our chances, may as well be open. But, indeed could do both.
I keep developing my interactive climate model in scala. As it's COP time of year, I try to fix code related to pledges (targets governments promised) and shares (what they should do if more equitable and ambitious). It’s not easy because they didn't agree any template, so each country has different format, also because sometimes the model works bottom-up (from details to total), sometimes top-down (inverse, to reach climate stabilisation goal), so the sequence of function calls varies, hard to organise the interactions. Generally it's much harder to make an interactive web tool where any unknown user may adjust hundreds of parameters, than to make fixed output to print in one research paper, unfortunately only the latter gets credit. At least scala makes such complexity manageable.
I think about encoding that in my model - e.g. assume a 50 year time-lag between current science influencing young people in formative years, and such people gaining power with a gerontocracy, what does that imply for solving such issues (a fuzzy-control problem - bearing in mind cumulative emissions, ocean layers, and ice-melt -> answer not good ... ).
Actually we knew most of this science 30 years ago, and some politicians try hard, problem is other distractions.
Ni la Seine non plus, le but de paris-plage c’était l’espace pour des citoyens se découvrir, au lieu des boites métalliques. (en tout cas, mon chien aime plonger dans la Meuse même en mi-hiver, et il y a des aussi des castors)
Too true.
I still remember when java5 came out, many new features, great potential for a massive refactoring of my interactive climate model. Within that, I had an idea called "parallel worlds" for comparing scenarios, whereby for efficiency data was shared for parts of the system, and split across parts that varied as user adjusted parameters. So I pulled apart the whole codebase, and joined it back together again... - about two years later, by which time colleagues had given up interest.
[ story simplified to relate to point of OP - not only task in two years! ].
Now I develop a derivative climate system model in scala,
but evidently it's more interesting to develop some new complex part of the science code, than fix a graphical interface for beginners. But moods vary - some days lacking energy for refactoring, could be satisfied ticking off a few small tasks in a todo list. Yet after some time, brain craving for another big new complex idea...
True, but in principle we (i.e. big teams) could make impacts functions for each case and combine by integrating over risk (within which, value judgements also make a big difference - but that's something to learn too). To fit those functions we needed more studies by ESMs with smaller differences at the low end - if you don't study it, you won't know it (hence my point years ago - those models are slow, and big committee-run processes even worse).