25

Because the energy transition has not yet been sufficient to reduce annual carbon emissions. From Our World in Data, here's annual total CO2 emissions, by world region: Since the 1960s, growth in low-carbon energy sources has only grown from about 6% to about 16% (source)-- not enough to make a dent, given that total energy use has grown faster than that. ...


22

Does this huge collective quantity of objects (together with space trash) reflect away enough solar radiation to have a measurable effect? Could this affect Earth's climate, mitigating climate change? No. Suppose, instead of 12,000 tiny satellites, SpaceX was planning on launching 12,000 satellites the size of the International Space Station. The ISS, with ...


2

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 ...


2

Deforestation does impact climate change and rainfall patterns. A study in 2018 outlined some of the feedbacks, firstly the direct effect of releasing CO2. Changes in evapotranspiration from deforestation caused 33% of the observed increases in the temperature of the hottest days in regions with at least 15% deforestation. There can be a counter factor in ...


2

(1) we set a threshold of 0.1 mm month−1 both for current and future GCM values = they masked out all grid cells with less than 0.1 mm month−1 precipitation. That way they're avoiding dividing by very small numbers in what you correctly identified as dry areas and (2) we truncate the top 2% of anomaly values to the 98th percentile value in the empirical ...


2

It's not the earth's core temperature per se that matters, but rather the amount of heat that flows from the core to the surface. Just like holding a cup of hot coffee - if the mug is insulated, it's fine, but if it's just thin metal, then your fingers will get burnt. The flux of heat through the surface of the solid earth is less than ~0.5 W/m$^{2}$. The ...


2

In theory, the methane emissions would warm the earth about 25 times more than the carbon dioxide emissions. That's because of something called the global warming potential. The global warming potential of a greenhouse gas is how much it warms the planet compared to carbon dioxide's base value of 1. As you might expect, methane's GWP is 25. Sources: https://...


1

Unlike fat under the skin of animals (& humans) there is no worldwide layer or layers of hydrocarbons below the surface of the Earth. Crude oil, and other hydrocarbons, occurs in distinct deposits at various locations globally. At some locations some deposits overlie each other and at others there may be just one layer but at many other locations there ...


1

This Skeptical Science article explains that geothermal is very small, $0.09W/m^2$, compared to radiant heat flows. It also does not change much in time, so it can be neglected in climate change calculations. For an airless planet the equilibrium temperature $T$ can be calculated from $$ F=\sigma T^4$$where $F$ is the average absorbed heat flux at the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible