The title kinda implies we get to net zero at all.
Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that one day on Earth there will be net zero carbon emissions. But will it be because humanity plans to and will work on it or because we screwed things up so badly.
I don't have a good feeling about that.
These women are incredibly courageous!
Last year I thought these people stand no chance against the governmental oppression and that the protests will fade.
But it appears I underestimated how strong and brave Persian women fight back!
This news story warms my heart.
I'm not denying the science, it is mathematically possible and I actually love the science behind it and reading about it.
I just say we are not yet near fusion power, I think. ITER will start experiments probably this decade. After that they plan to build DEMO, a follow up project which will deliver a little power.
Keep in mind that these reactors are very difficult to built, still. It takes decades to build even without delays.
Fusion is a beautiful source of energy, but it'll still take time. I don't think for example that fusion will play a major role in the transition away from fossil fuels as that needs to happen much faster.
Mathematically net positive. As calculating the fusion's released energy versus what was needed to get it there. As far as I know there is no technology yet on how to utilize and extract that energy. So zero kWh produced for now.
Then you still have loss in the generators or turbines. And then it needs to be able to run 24/7 instead of split seconds, which brings the problem of how to add fuel constantly and how to remove the fusion's results.
It might be possible but I doubt we are somewhat near.
Doctor, are you saying I don't need to change my habits and stop my alcoholism in order to help my dying liver? I can just eat painkillers and will feel like normal? Cheers!
The article didn't start bad. But then the author didn't get the right conclusion.
Yes, the current climate data are devastating. Yes, there is also development in some (mostly rich) countries. But to put this into perspective: while the rate of GHG emmissions need to drop faster than they did 2020 during the pandemic, they are just stagnating in developed countries while rising in developing countries. Globally carbon emissions are still rising.
The reality is: the climate is changing faster than anticipated and the transition away from fossil fuels is nowhere near fast enough. We need to stop emitting GHG basically yesterday. Instead we bury the 1.5 °C target and hope for carbon sinks to help us get to net zero. Both natural sinks as also artificial sinks. Artificial sinks are still extremely expensive and ineffective while the remaining natural carbon sinks get destroyed and turn into carbon emitters.
What would need to happen is a massive effort through all society in every country. That would also mean for first world countries to not only forgive debts of poor countries, but also at least help financing poor countries transition.
The majority of people are just starting to take climate change seriously and the threat is still underestimated by most.
No, this is not the time for stubborn optimism. This is the time for worry. This is the time for anger. This is the time to reject pledges and promises by governments and demand actual action and legislative change. Being optimistic won't help us change.
Nothing to worry about (/s), this problem will actually resolve itself!
Water melt will peak around the middle of century and after that the water, which about a quarter of humanity depends on, will slowly cease to flow.