4
$\begingroup$

My understanding of climate change is that a large increase in human-caused CO2 emissions is likely to lead to large change in the Earth's climate through a global warming effect. Scientific consensus appears to me to be that if we make similarly large reductions in CO2 emissions, we can reduce the magnitude of the consequent warming.

I also understand the climate to have many non-linear mechanisms whereby the link between emission and warming isn't at all straightforward - and so we can only talk about broad averages and so forth, rather than make specific weather predictions.

So is it always true that a reduction in emissions will - on average - cause a reduction in the global warming effect, however small? Or does the existence of tipping points or any other factor mean that only large reductions can make a difference now and any lesser reduction will be pointless?

My intuition says that smaller cuts in emissions should still be preferred to no cuts at all, as I imagine that they would reduce the peak warming and/or delay the peak for longer and/or reduce the eventual recovery time. Perhaps not by as much as we might prefer, but still better than nothing. But perhaps my intuition is off.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ So far the atmospheric CO2 is continuing to rise at an increasing rate , so I wouldn't worry about it being reduced too rapidly. ( See Mauna Loa charts) . $\endgroup$ Jun 20 at 0:54
7
$\begingroup$

Yes, because carbon emissions are like a budget. The Mercator Institute has one of the most commonly cited analyses of our carbon budget:

the atmosphere can absorb, calculated from end-2017, no more than 420 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO2 if we are to stay below the 1.5°C threshold. Annual emissions of CO2 – from burning fossil fuels, industrial processes and land-use change – are estimated to be around 42 Gt per year, the equivalent of 1,332 tonnes per second. With emissions at a constant level, the budget would be expected to be used up in less than seven years from now. The budget for staying below the 2°C threshold, for its part, of approximately 1,170 Gt, would be exhausted in about 25 years.

So, just like a household or business budget, small (but persistent) reductions in spending/emissions do make a difference in the long run.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.