The Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, reported a daily average carbon dioxide (CO₂) at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, of 428.63 parts per million (ppm) on April 26, 2024, as illustrated by the image below.
This is the highest daily average on record at Mauna Loa, which is the more remarkable since the annual CO₂ maximum is typically reached in May, so even higher values are likely to be reached over the next few weeks.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows that the weekly mean CO₂ at Mauna Loa was 427.94 ppm for the week beginning on April 21, 2024, i.e. 3.98 ppm higher than the 423.96 ppm for the week 1 year earlier.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows that the daily mean CO₂ at Mauna Loa on April 26, 2024, was 428.59 ppm, a difference of 4.7 ppm from April 26, 2023.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows that the annual CO₂ growth at Mauna Loa in 2023 was 3.36 ppm, the highest annual growth on record.
The image below shows the daily average carbon dioxide recorded by NOAA over the past few years at Mauna Loa, Hawaii.
Clouds Tipping Point
The image below illustrates that a polynomial trend (red) follows the recent acceleration in CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere more than a linear trend (blue). Data used are NOAA Mauna Loa weekly average CO₂ data through the week starting on April 21, 2024 (data downloaded April 28, 2024).
The image below is the same as the image above, except that the canvas is zoomed out to show all data on record with trends extended to 2060 (X-axis) and CO₂ concentration going from 300 ppm to 1200 ppm (Y-axis).
The red polynomial trend also illustrates how rising CO₂ can cause the clouds tipping point at 1200 ppm to be crossed well before 2060, i.e. earlier than anticipated in IPCC models (inset).
Moreover, the clouds tipping point could be crossed much earlier than 2060 when also taking into account methane. Peak daily average methane is approaching 2000 parts per billion (ppb) at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, as illustrated by the image below.
A methane concentration of 2000 ppb corresponds, at a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of 200, with a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) of 400 ppm. Together with the above daily average CO₂ concentration of 428.63 ppm this adds up to a joint CO₂e of 828.63 ppm, i.e. only 371.37 ppm away from the clouds tipping point (at 1200 ppm CO₂e) that on its own could raise the global temperature by 8°C.
This 371.37 ppm CO₂e could be added almost immediately by a burst of seafloor methane less than the size of the methane that is currently in the atmosphere (about 5 Gt). There is plenty of potential for such an abrupt release, given the rising ocean heat and the vast amounts of methane present in vulnerable sediments at the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, as discussed in earlier posts such as this one.
Already now, local peaks can at times reach very high levels. The image below shows that the NOAA-20 satellite recorded a peak level of 2432 ppb at 399.1 mb on April 25, 2024, am.
The MetOp-B satellite (also known as MetOp-1) recorded a peak methane level of 3644 ppb and a mean level of 1944 ppb at 367 mb on November 21, 2021, pm, as illustrated by the image below.
Catastrophic crack propagation is what makes a balloon pop. Could low-lying clouds similarly break up and vanish abruptly? Could peak greenhouse gas concentrations in one spot break up droplets into water vapor, thus raising CO₂e and propagating break-up of more droplets, etc., to shatter entire clouds?
Could a combination of high CO₂ levels and high peak levels of methane suffice to cause the clouds tipping point to be crossed?
Moreover, nitrous oxide is also rising and there are additional elements that could further speed up the rise in CO₂e, as discussed at the Extinction page and this earlier post that warn about the potential for a temperature rise of well over 18°C to unfold as early as 2026.
A 2018 study (by Strona & Bradshaw) indicates that most life on Earth will disappear with a 5°C rise. Humans, who depend for their survival on many other species, will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise, as illustrated by the image below, from an earlier post.
Environmental crimes
The accelerating growth in carbon dioxide indicates that politicians have failed and are failing to take adequate action.
Current laws punish people for the most trivial things, while leaving the largest crime one can imagine unpunished: planetary omnicide!
If we accept that crimes against humanity include climate crimes, then politicians who inadequately act on the unfolding climate catastrophe are committing crimes against humanity and they should be brought before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, the Netherlands.
The situation is dire and the precautionary principle calls for rapid, comprehensive and effective action to reduce the damage and to improve the situation, as described in this 2022 post, where needed in combination with a Climate Emergency Declaration, as discussed at this group.
On March 15, 2024, the daily average carbon dioxide (CO₂) at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, was 427.93 parts per million (ppm), as illustrated by the image below, adapted from NOAA.
This is the highest daily in situ average in the NOAA record at Mauna Loa, which is the more remarkable since the annual CO₂ maximum is typically reached in May, so even higher values are likely to be reached over the next few months.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows 31 days of CO₂ at Mauna Loa, Hawaii. The image shows that a daily mean CO₂ of 427.93 ppm was recorded on March 15, 2024, and that many of the hourly averages that were recorded in April 2024 were higher than 430 ppm.
The image below, adapted from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, shows that CO₂ at Mauna Loa was 427.80 ppm on March 14, 2024. The background shows six months of CO₂ ending March 15, 2024.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows that the monthly mean CO₂ at Mauna Loa in March 2024 was 425.38 ppm, a growth of 4.39 ppm compared to March 2023.
The image below, adapted from NOAA, shows that the annual CO₂ growth at Mauna Loa in 2023 was 3.36 ppm, the highest annual growth on record.
Temperature rise
The February 2024 global surface temperature is 1.75°C or 3.15°F when compared to a base of 1886-1915, i.e. a 30-year period centered around the year 1900, as illustrated by the image below. The image shows part (from 1980) of a graph based on NASA Land+Ocean data from January 1880 through February 2024, with the black squares showing the raw monthly data.
The rise is as large as 2.74°C or 3.132°F when compared to a pre-industrial base and when also taking into account ocean air temperatures and higher polar anomalies, as indicated in the bright yellow inset on the image below.
Lowess smoothing (red line, 1 year window) highlights variability between years and the huge rise that has occurred recently, which is partly caused by variability such as associated with El Niño.
The red line also highlights the potential for an even larger rise to come soon, as feedbacks and further developments start to kick in with greater ferocity, contributing to non-linear and abrupt temperature rise, as discussed in earlier posts such as this one and this one.
The use of an early date for a pre-industrial base is discussed at the pre-industrial page and is supported by recent analysis of sponges collected in the Caribbean, illustrated by the image below.
Other recent research debunks the idea that Earth’s surface (across land and sea) has experienced really hot temperatures over the last two billion years. Instead, it shows that Earth has had a relatively stable and mild climate. This makes the threat of a huge temperature rise over the next few years even more menacing.
The temperature is rising most rapidly in the Arctic. Loss of sea ice threatens to accelerate the temperature rise in the Arctic even more, and cause destabilization of methane hydrates at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean and thawing of permafrost on land, resulting in massive releases of greenhouse gases, further acceleration of the temperature rise and widespread extinction of species (including humans) as early as in the year 2026.
Clouds Tipping Point
The image below illustrates that a polynomial trend (red) can better capture the acceleration in the rise in CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere than a linear trend (blue).
The red polynomial trend also illustrates how rising CO₂ can cause the clouds tipping point at 1200 ppm to be crossed before 2100, i.e. earlier than anticipated in IPCC models (inset).
Moreover, the clouds tipping point could be crossed much earlier when also taking into account methane. Monthly methane was about 1960 parts per billion (ppb) recently at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, as illustrated by the image below.
A methane concentration of 1960 ppb corresponds, at a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of 200, with a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) of 392 ppm. Together with the above daily average CO₂ concentration of 427.93 ppm this adds up to a joint CO₂e of 819.93 ppm, i.e. only 380.07 ppm away from the clouds tipping point (at 1200 ppm CO₂e) that on its own could raise the global temperature by 8°C.
This 380.07 ppm CO₂e could be added almost immediately by a burst of seafloor methane less than the size of the methane that is currently in the atmosphere (about 5 Gt). There is plenty of potential for such an abrupt release, given the rising ocean heat and the vast amounts of methane present in vulnerable sediments at the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, as discussed in earlier posts such as this one.
Furthermore, nitrous oxide is also rising and there are additional elements that could further speed up the temperatures rise, as discussed at the Extinction page, which shows that, altogether, there is the potential for a temperature rise of well over 18°C by 2026.
A 2018 study (by Strona & Bradshaw) indicates that most life on Earth will disappear with a 5°C rise. Humans, who depend for their survival on many other species, will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise, as illustrated by the image below, from an earlier post.
Environmental crimes
The accelerating growth in carbon dioxide indicates that politicians have failed and are failing to take adequate action.
Current laws punish people for the most trivial things, while leaving the largest crime one can imagine unpunished: planetary omnicide!
If we accept that crimes against humanity include climate crimes, then politicians who inadequately act on the unfolding climate catastrophe are committing crimes against humanity and they should be brought before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, the Netherlands.
Meanwhile, Belgium has recognised ecocide as international crime and the EU Parliament has voted to criminalize the most serious cases of ecosystem destruction.
Climate Emergency Declaration
The situation is dire and the precautionary principle calls for rapid, comprehensive and effective action to reduce the damage and to improve the situation, as described in this 2022 post, where needed in combination with a Climate Emergency Declaration, as discussed at this group.
The IPCC just released its report Global Warming of 1.5°C. Things aren't looking good and instead of providing good advice and guidance, the IPCC bends over backward in efforts to keep feeding the addiction.
The Paris Agreement constitutes a joint commitment by all nations of the world to keep the temperature rise below 1.5°C. The IPCC should have honored this commitment by explaining that the situation is dire and by pointing at action to be taken to improve the situation.
Instead, the IPCC bends over backward to make it look as if temperatures were lower than they really are, in an effort to make it look as if there were carbon budgets to be divided, and polluters should be allowed to keep polluting until those budgets had run out. This is like saying that drug junkies who cause damage and are deeply in debt, should be handed over more OPM (other people's money, in this case the future of all people and other species).
In reality, there is no carbon budget to be divided, there is just a huge carbon debt to be repaid. The urgency and imperative to act is such that progress in one area cannot make up for delays elsewhere. The best policies should be implemented immediately, and everywhere across the world.
Use of terms such as trade-offs, net-outcomes, off-sets, carbon budgets and negative emissions is misguided and highly misleading. Policies based on giving and trading in permits to pollute are less effective than local feebates, i.e. policies that impose fees on sales of polluting products and then use the revenues to support rebates on the better alternatives sold locally.
Here are twelve instances where the IPCC is misleading:
Changing the baseline set at the Paris Agreement
The Paris Agreement is clear that pre-industrial is to be used as baseline. The IPCC defines pre-industrial as the multi-century period prior to the onset of large-scale industrial activity around 1750, andthen proceeds to use as baseline 1850-1900, a period when the Industrial Revolution had long started. This compromises the entire Paris Agreement and thus the integrity of us all. Temperatures in 1900 may well have been 0.3°C higher than pre-industrial, as depicted in above image in the light blue block. Add up the impact of further warming elements and it may well be that people have caused around 2°C of warming already and that we're facing warming of more than 10°C by 2026.
Misleading calculations and wording
The IPCC suggests that warming caused by people is 1.0°C (±0.2°C), likely to reach 1.5°C between 2030 and 2052. To reach these numbers, the IPCC used misleading calculations in efforts to downplay how dangerous the situation is, as discussed further below. As an example of misleading wording, the IPCC says it has high confidence that 1.5°C won't be reached until 2030 if warming continues to increase at the current rate of 0.2°C per decade. Sure, if warming was 1.0°C and if the temperature rise was indeed increasing by 0.2°C per decade and if that rise would continue at 0.2°C per decade, yes, then it would take 25 years for warming to reach 1.5°C. But the reality is that warming is already far more than 1.0°C and that it is accelerating. That makes it misleading to associate high confidence with the suggestion that warming will not reach 1.5°C until 2030. The suggestion of a straight line (linear trend) is misleading in the first place, since warming is accelerating. The suggestion of a straight line is even more misleading when making projections into the future and when qualifications such as high confidence are added.
Ignoring the importance of peaks
Daily and monthly peaks are obviously higher than annual averages, and it's those high peaks that kill, making it disrespectful toward past and future victims of extreme weather events to average that away. The image on the right shows that in February 2016, it was on average 1.70°C warmer than in 1900 (1885-1914 i.e. a 30-year period centered around 1900), while the higher latitudes North had anomalies of up to 15.1°C. The IPCC failed to warn people, who mostly live on land on the Northern Hemisphere, how high anomalies were in February 2016. Conservatively, the magenta block at the top of the bar in above image shows a rise of 1.62°C for February 2016. Note that this is the rise from 1900, i.e. before adding 0.3°C for the rise before 1900, and before adding further adjustments as discussed below.
Cherry-picking the baseline period
The image on the right shows that, for a baseline of a 30-year period around the year 1900, the temperature rise to 2016-2017 was 1.25°C. When adding a further 0.3°C rise for the rise before 1900, warming was well above 1.5°C in 2016-2017. Yet, while first defining pre-industrial as the multi-century period prior to the onset of large-scale industrial activity around 1750, the IPCC then uses 1850-1900 as baseline, a period when it was relatively warm, i.e. warmer than in 1750 and warmer also than in 1900. It was warmer over 1850-1900 due to increasing livestock numbers and forests clearing, while huge amounts of wood were burned, all contributing to large emissions of black carbon, brown carbon, methane, CO, etc., which caused additional warming during this period. So, this period was relatively warm. There was little impact yet of the sulfur aerosols that started coming with burning fossil fuel from 1900. Choosing this period enabled the IPCC to beef up the temperature for its baseline and then draw trends that looks flatter than they would have been if drawn from pre-industrial, to suggest that global warming was only 1°C and that 1.5°C would not be reached until somewhere between 2030 and 2052.
Changing the data
The U.K. Met Office's HadCRUT dataset goes back to 1850. The IPCC used this dataset, but actually changed the data, by averaging the data with datasets that showed a similar rise for the years after 1900, but that showed higher warming for 1880-1900. This enabled the IPCC to further beef up the average temperature for the period 1850-1900 and then draw a linear trend from 1850-1900 that looks even flatter.
Cherry-picking the type of data
To further support its suggestions, the IPCC uses water surface data for ocean temperature, but uses air data for temperatures over land. When selecting datasets with more consistency and using air temperatures globally, the temperature rise is 0.1°C higher.
Not using new techniques to estimate values for missing data
The IPCC chooses not to use new techniques to estimate temperatures where data are missing. Less data are available for the Arctic, and this is precisely where temperatures have risen much faster than in the rest of the world. When values for missing data are included, the temperature rise is another 0.1°C higher.
Leaving out 2016
The IPCC says the Special Report is an assessment of the relevant
state of knowledge, based on the scientific and technical
literature available and accepted for publication up to
15 May 2018. Yet, the IPCC says that global warming is currently increasing at 0.2°C per decade, as if the high temperatures in 2016 didn't occur. To arrive at 0.2°C, the IPCC used the period of 2006-2015 and used data from a specific dataset, and then rounded down the value. By contrast, NASA data show a rate of increase of 0.3°C over 2006-2015, 0.4°C over 2007-2016 and 0.4°C over 2008-2017. Failure to properly address acceleration of future warming is further discussed in the point below.
Failure to properly address dangerous developments
The IPCC fails to point out that carbon dioxide reaches a maximum in warming the atmosphere some 10 years after emission, which means that the full wrath of global warming due to the very high emissions of carbon dioxide over the past decade is yet to come. While temperatures could rise very rapidly over the coming decade, the IPCC keeps talking about carbon budgets, without properly addressing tipping points such as the decline of the snow and ice cover that will result in huge albedo losses, jet stream changes, more and more extreme weather events, and more. The IPCC fails to point out the danger of destabilization of sediments containing methane in the form of hydrates and free gas. Furthermore, the IPCC fails to properly address the aerosol warming that will occur as sulfur emissions decrease and other aerosols increase such as black carbon, brown carbon, etc. The IPCC fails to mention the water vapor feedback, i.e. the increase of water vapor in the atmosphere that will occur as a result of these developments. Since water vapor itself is a potent greenhouse gas, this will speed up the temperature rise even further. These developments could lead to a potential global temperature rise (from 1750) of more than 10°C by 2026, as illustrated in the image at the top.
There is no carbon budget left
Instead of pointing at the dangers, as it should have done, the IPCC makes it look as if there was a remaining carbon budget that should be divided among polluters, as if they should continue polluting the world. The IPCC creates this illusion by interpreting the thresholds set at the Paris Agreement as averages over a 30-year period, while ignoring the acceleration of the temperature rise. It should be obvious that there is no such budget. Instead, there's only a huge and very dangerous carbon debt. There is no room for trade-offs or offsets, and terms such as negative emissions are also inappropriate. All efforts should be made to cut emissions, including ending current subsidies for fossil fuel and livestock, while at the same time great effort should be taken to remove carbon from the atmosphere and oceans. And even then, it's questionable whether any humans will be able to survive the coming decade, which will be critically dangerous for all species on Earth.
Suggesting polluting pathways
The pathways suggested by the IPCC keep fossil fuel in the picture for many years, while highlighting non-solutions such as BECCS. The IPCC makes it look as if coal-fired power plants could continue to operate, by burning more biomass and capturing carbon. The IPCC makes it look as if transport could continue to use internal combustion engines, by burning more biofuel. Instead, clean & renewable energy has many benefits, including that it's more economic, so air capture powered by such facilities would make more sense than BECCS. Furthermore, electric vehicles should be supported now, rather than in the year 2050. It makes sense to stop fossil fuel subsidies, and to support better diets, to plant more vegetation and to support ways to add carbon and nutrients to soils and oceans, such as with biochar and ground rocks. Many technologies have been proposed, e.g. refrigerators and freezers are now made that do not use gases for cooling. The IPCC should not have used pathways that are wrong in the first place. Instead, the IPCC should have pointed at the policies that can best facilitate the necessary transitions, because the scientific evidence is overwhelming and it's the right thing to do.
Not pointing at the best and much-needed policy tools
The IPCC report fails to point out that imposing fees on polluting products is the most effective policy instrument, the more so when the revenues are used to support rebates on better alternatives supplied locally.
The situation is dire and calls for comprehensive and effective action, as described at the Climate Plan.
Prof. Peter Wadhams and Stuart Scott discuss the IPCC Global Warming of 1.5ºC report
Extended version of above video
Paul Beckwith on baseline, methane and more
Stuart Scott talks with Prof. Peter Wadhams on Arctic sea ice
Magnificent work by Stefanie Steven
[ budget ]
Proper analysis would have pointed at what the best action is to improve the situation.
However, the IPCC does not do that. Instead, the IPCC keeps stating that there was a carbon budget to be divided and consumed, while advocating non-solutions such as BECCS and while hiding the full extent of how threatening the situation is.
A quick word count of the IPCC report Global Warming of 1.5°C (SPM) shows paragraphs full of words such as budget (1st image right) and of non-solutions such as BECCS (2nd image right).
[ BECCS ]
At the same time, it fails to mention biochar, meat or local feebates. It fails to mention the huge threat of feedbacks and tipping points such as methane hydrates and Arctic sea ice, instead making it look as if all that could only pose potential problems over longer timescales.
This is indicative of how much the IPCC is part of the problem and part and parcel of the wilful destruction of life itself that is taking place so obviously all around us.
The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) might as well change its name to IPCD (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Destruction).
It's not as if people weren't warned.
The danger was described back in 2007: Total Extinction.
The mechanism was depicted back in 2011: Runaway Global Warming.
And still, in 2018, the IPCC sadly keeps on feeding the addiction.
A linear trendline shows steady growth in the annual increase in CO2 levels, despite promises to reduce emissions.
Furthermore, recent increases show a worrying trend illustrated in the graph by a 4th order polynomial trendline.
GROWTH RATE OF CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE
The world is probably at the start of a runaway Greenhouse Event which will end most human life on Earth before 2040. This will occur because of a massive and rapid increase in the carbon dioxide concentration in the air which has just accelerated significantly. The increasing Greenhouse Gas concentration, the gases which cause Global Warming, will very soon cause a rapid warming of the global climate and a chaotic climate.
Immediately before the Industrial Revolution, in 1750, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air which had been stable for millennia, the main Greenhouse gas, was 280 parts per million, but in 2013 it is likely to average 395 parts per million. It has been increasing at an increasing rate since 1750.
In 1960 the carbon dioxide concentration was 315 parts per million and in the 1960’s the concentration was increasing at 0.8 parts per million per year, in the 1980’s at 1.6 parts per million and from 2003 until 2011 inclusive it rose at 2 .0 parts per year.
In 2012 it rose 2.39 parts. Between July 2012 and July 2013 atmospheric carbon dioxide increased in concentration by 3.35 parts, by far the largest 12 month increase ever.
THIS HUGE INCREASE SHOULD BE PUBLISHED EVERYWHERE WORLDWIDE NOW
ASSESSMENT
When there have been large anomalous increases in the past, though nothing like this, there has been a rapid return to near normal but this is probably slightly different. The most likely growth in the calendar year 2013 is likely to be about 2.85 parts per million, a calendar year record , but much below the growth from July 2012 until July 2013. The growth for 2012 and 2013 is likely to average out at about 2.62 parts per million, a record for a two year period.
Again, looking to the past, when there has been a rise in concentration like we will have had in 2012 and 2013 the rate of increase in concentration diminishes for a couple of years before rising again. I would expect the rise in concentration in 2014 and 2015 to average 2.55 parts per million before rising at an increasing rate thereafter assuming the world carries on with business as usual. Nevertheless this average rate is faster than we have yet witnessed except for the 2012 and 2013 period. This rate of increase is much faster than that which preceded the greatest ever wipe out of life on earth 249 million years ago.
There is a significant uncertainty about the above growth rate in the near term, with a chance of a higher and lower growth rate though the above forecast is the most likely outcome.
There must be a small chance that this is really the start of a very fast runaway event. Should the growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2013 be greater than about 3.1 parts per million then the world will probably have entered a very fast runaway event.
It is even more absolutely critical that carbon dioxide concentrations from August 2013 onwards are rising at a slower rate than between July 2012 and July 2013 otherwise the world will have entered a very fast runaway Greenhouse Event. Carbon Dioxide concentrations will almost certainly be rising at a slower rate from August 2013 onwards.
The runaway greenhouse event, or a very fast runaway Greenhouse Event is probably just starting, and can only be stopped by an immediate response. The danger is that it will very rapidly run out of our control. I think the net negative feedback to greenhouse gas emissions is just starting to diminish. It is not clear whether this is because the sinks are absorbing less carbon dioxide or a form of positive feedback is starting probably a bit of both.
The rising carbon dioxide levels will probably lead to rising global temperatures from about 2015 onwards which will cause more climatic disruption, especially severe droughts, and thus more carbon emissions almost certainly before 2020.
This is going to occur at a time when the Arctic Ocean will probably become free of sea ice leading to a different set of runaway events which will coalesce with the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
This will lead to societal collapse after rising global temperatures have caused severe droughts and a global famine at some time prior to 2040, but probably much sooner in about 2020 or in the 2020’s.
IMMEDIATE ACTION IS CRUCIAL
The absolute priority is that the world’s public and politicians are told about the rapidly increasing rate of carbon dioxide concentrations in the air which will cause a runaway Greenhouse Event, both in the media and in social media. The gravity of the situation needs to be accepted and all nations agree to co-operate to solve the problem.
There needs to be a world conference at which all nations agree the grave situation that the world is facing and that urgent and drastic action is essential. They need to accept and agree that all nations will cut greenhouse gas emissions to an accepted and equal low level of emissions per person. This will mean that only nations with very small emissions per person like the Central African Republic will not need to make any emission cuts. The rate of increase in Carbon Dioxide needs to be cut to 2 parts per million per annum by 2015 onwards. The arctic needs to be cooled so that the sea ice does not all melt before the end of the Arctic Summer.
Reducing the rate of carbon dioxide build-up in the atmosphere will be astoundingly difficult. Emissions must be cut drastically, but this will lead to a reduction of Sulphate aerosols in the atmosphere, which might cause temperatures to rise and more carbon to be emitted from biomass as droughts become more severe. The solution is to try the relatively easy route and then use geo-engineering as necessary. This involves huge societal changes, a more egalitarian society and a smaller global economy, but if it is not done almost everybody will die.
Secondly, a group of scientists needs to be formed under the authority of the United Nations to formulate geo-engineering technologies, to go together with cuts in emissions, to reduce the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere, such as planting forests, and to cool the arctic to save the arctic sea ice.
The immediate priority is to accept the gravity of the situation and that all nations and peoples will co-operate to solve the problem.
These measures will give humanity a chance of saving civilization.
