That’s still the lowest end of RCP8.5. Many are projecting that we could be on RCP4.5 once we reach where the pathways would diverge (2050), the problem with that is it assumes some large scale CCS and a flatlining of emissions (net zero). If those happen, then 3 degrees might be a top end and we’ll only have a small amount of catastrophe(?!).

My disbelief is a number of things - human nature to change is a big one, I can’t see us changing much without a huge motivational reason (read major disasters and/or population decrease from impacts). Another is the physics of CCS, the scale needed for any large effect is just beyond anything we can do, and I think it might be far more than just the energy requirements, so say a fusion breakthrough may not improve the abilities. Lastly, the feedbacks that will be set off as we go into 2 degrees will take over the path the Earth’s environment changes towards, and we can’t stop them.

We need to continue to talk about heavy reductions in emissions, which also means lessening consumption and growth of everything. Not only to reduce the future results, but to prepare for living in a harsher world where that kind of society can’t exist. We’re in an extinction event, and we better pre-adapt before it’s necessary otherwise we’ll be one of the species. That may already be a foregone conclusion, but it will be a certainty if we continue how we’ve been going.

Which efforts, exactly? The Keeling curve shows zero impact, and the other greenhouse gases are worse.

Yeah, I think given current trajectories somewhere between RCP 3.4 and 4.5, with emissions peaking around 2050. Given technological and political headwinds, I just can’t see emissions peaking in 2080 or 2100 with growth rates already slowing globally and peaking in North America and Europe

Thats… Disastrous…