Most climate scientists do not subscribe to the 2 degrees “Dangerous Climate Change” meme

Bishop Hill presents commentary from Richard Betts, head of Climate Impacts at the UK Met Office – not your usual hysterical hand-waving

Dangerous climate change?
This is a slightly edited version of a comment Richard Betts left on the discussion forum. I thought it was quite challenging to much of what we hear about climate change in the mainstream media and therefore worthy of posting here as a header post. (Richard, for anyone visiting for the first time, is head of climate impacts at the Met Office).

Most climate scientists* do not subscribe to the 2 degrees “Dangerous Climate Change” meme (I know I don’t). “Dangerous” is a value judgement, and the relationship between any particular level of global mean temperature rise and impacts on society are fraught with uncertainties, including the nature of regional climate responses and the vulnerability/resilience of society. The most solid evidence for something with serious global implications that might happen at 2 degrees is the possible passing of a key threshold for the Greenland ice sheet, but even then that’s the lower limit and also would probably take centuries to take full effect. Other impacts like drought and crop failures are massively uncertain, and while severe negative impacts may occur in some regions, positive impacts may occur in others. While the major negative impacts can’t be ruled out, their certainty is wildly over-stated.

While really bad things may happen at 2 degrees, they may very well not happen either – especially in the short term (there may be a committment to longer-term consequences such as ongoing sea level rise that future generations have to deal with, but imminent catastrophe affecting the current generation is far less certain than people make out. We just don’t know. (Bishop Hill)

3 responses to “Most climate scientists do not subscribe to the 2 degrees “Dangerous Climate Change” meme

  1. One mild winter in the northern hemisphere would reduce carbon output more than all the hare brained schemes proposed by global warmers. Imagine less furnace output, lowered power plant emissions, less stalled traffic, reduced snow removal equipment operations.

  2. 2C dangerous? This statement is from one who neither knows nor cares about the actual temperature changes and differences on this planet. diurnal change in parts of the Sahara is 50C. The difference between the planet’s maximum and minimum temperatures 130C.

    2C dangerous? NO.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s