Record breaking June temperatures have been deadly in Europe as the mercury soared past 40 degrees in several locations. The heat was hard to handle in Paris, London and Berlin, but our expert says we need to get used to it. But, how fast can we adapt to a scorching new-normal?

    • Zacryon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Even 0.00001 % can be significant depending on context. You can not just say “nah my gut tells me that’s not a large number and therefore it’s not significant”. Missing the context of the data can lead to unfaithful and wrong interpretations. Just look at physicists how crazy they can get when they’ve made a 10^-7 more accurate measurement of a universal constant. Furthermore, we also have mathematical methods to investigate the significance of statistical measurements.

      But enough ranting, getting to the context now:

      First the numbers: depending on source, the estimate of the temporary reduction in CO2 emissions varies, but all agree that it dropped sharply. For example, the IEA estimates about 5,8 % reduction in energy related emissions IEA and notes:

      Global CO2 emissions declined by 5.8% in 2020, or almost 2 Gt CO2 – the largest ever decline and almost five times greater than the 2009 decline that followed the global financial crisis.

      Now the context to answer: was it significant?
      Looking at various data:

      • A Nature Climate Change study estimated the direct pandemic-driven effect as only about 0.01 ± 0.005°C cooling by 2030 compared with a baseline scenario. Nature That’s like a drop of water on a hot stone.
      • The IPCC concluded with high confidence that COVID-related emission reductions were not thought to have caused a detectable change in global temperature and were within variability. IPCC

      Furthermore, emissions rebound quickly.

      We can pull out even more. But to keep it short:
      No. It was indeed not significant and in this case you’re right.

      However, it also highlighted other things: the reduction in total emissions and emission rates dropped sharply, showing that if we would’ve wanted to, we could have done more to fight climate change long ago. (Although the emissions were still rising overall, despite the drop.) We still can.
      Secondly, numerous reports revealed significant improvements in air quality in the short amount of time. So at least in this regard, it was indeed a significant change.

      Overall it wasn’t totally meaningless. Although it didn’t really do anything against climate change, it revealed our potential for long term impacts.

      Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        35 minutes ago

        Wdym by “if we wanted to”?? We as a species have always been able to turn shit off what are you talking about?

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        36 minutes ago

        It’s not significant meaning it’s not a good solution. Covid didn’t see reductions in emissions from its largest source: power generation.

        Covid isn’t a good example on how to reduce emissions. It is a good example on how carbon-dependent our economy is.