3
$\begingroup$

Suppose that the IPCC's best estimate of climate sensitivity (3 K) is relevant and that the Keeling curve will increase as now, with a certain procent more emission next year than previous year, into year 2100, when would the average temperature earliest become low enought for a new period of glaciation, due to the Milankovitch cycles?

enter image description here enter image description here

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ I asked a similar question and David Hammen says in 50.000 years $\endgroup$ Aug 24 at 6:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That contradicts a common cc deniers argue (that we need to warm the atmosphere to evitate a glaciation). In 50.000 years the technology for sure will modelate climate with a better understanding of Earth System. We are just worsing things causing human and economic losts due to extreme events needlessly. That is observed with an increase of 1.1ºC and quantified by IPCC. Nobody knows well the consequences of an increase of 3 or 4ºC. $\endgroup$ Aug 24 at 6:34
  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean by "worse case"? Which is worse, hundreds of years from now (not likely), many tens of thousands of years from now, or never? $\endgroup$ Aug 26 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidHammen - I mean how long the pause will be because of AGW now and in the future. $\endgroup$
    – Lehs
    Aug 29 at 12:05
2
$\begingroup$

Milankovich cycles are steady predictors, so sometime in the next 24-50 thousand years. But "Glaciation" is a broad terms, glaciers take long time to accumulate, but they accumulate, EVEN NOW. 100 years is simply too short a time frame to judge circumstances for long term climate trends. We just emerged from the little ice age, during which there were glaciers, that receded by the 1880's

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Would the atmospheric carbon dioxide of today move to the lithosphere in that time scale? $\endgroup$
    – Lehs
    Aug 24 at 8:58
  • $\begingroup$ We emitted a few million years worth of buried CO2 back into the atmosphere. MOST of the planets CO2 was not absorbed by photosynthesis but by geologic progeny (rocks) as Carbonates, that process has slowed alot since then. Returning atmospheric conditions back to pre-industrial levels, not that I would support it (285 ppm) would take well over 1000 years or more. $\endgroup$
    – LazyReader
    Aug 26 at 9:16

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.