GLOBAL EXTINCTION WITHIN ONE HUMAN LIFETIME?

[NoOneMan]

108. There probably aren't real world steps

We are feeling the consequences now of the aggregate sum of emissions released during the last 50+ years. What was kicked up yesterday is still going to be in the atmosphere for the next 50 to 100 years. IOW, we aren't even yet seeing what happens when you kick up 30+ gigatons of carbon a year over and over and over, but since we already kicked it up, we will inevitably see the consequences at some time in the future. Burning more carbon to fix these issues (making shiny techno saviors) is really a non-solution, as its benefit will not be felt for at least a century, but its impact ("carbon debt&quot will be felt now and until that time.

The steps we should now be taking is 1) figuring out how to survive in at least a +4C and beyond world, and 2) how to transition our civilization (or post-civilization) to near carbon independence almost immediately, such they we can be sustainable once "the smoke clears".

Both approaches are being avoided like the plague by people in charge, because in some way, they both admit the "failure" of civilization. So likely, not only aren't there real world steps toward "safe" mitigation, whatever steps that are real are not politically viable.

This is why climate talks really aren't producing anything of value. There is nothing of value that can be considered a workable plan, insofar as that plan operates within the confines of an infinite growth civilization. So the only action in the meantime will be mostly symbolic, until the magnitude of the situation really become apparent. At which point, the last remaining "solution" that will be attempted, from what I can tell, will be polluting the atmosphere with sulphates and hoping beyond hope we don't screw it up worse.