1.5°C climat goal is gone with 2024/2025 being every day being above that. A positive view of science says we are heading to a 2.7°C hell by 2100. Thought with current politics that is highly doubtful and we might already have that with 2050.

Especially fellow young people, i would like to hear your look apon the future, are you doing something now because you probably wont be able to do it in the future?

How will you imagine life will be like? Will you have to move because of the rising sea levels?

For me i see black. Its over and this is the coldest we will ever have it. I am enjoying somewhat livible summers and lukewarm winters (I remember when there was snow) as long as i can. The future is done for and im angry and sadend by all the people that dont care or actively fight against enviormental policies and living

    • MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca
      2·
      21 days ago

      Yup, and the rate of change is massive compared to every other time climate has shifted. What normally takes tens of thousands of years we’re speed running in a couple hundred. This doesn’t give a lot of time for life to adapt to the rapid changes, and all the associated affects that come with it (sea level change, sea salinity change, currents shifting, etc).

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      21 days ago

      The “current path” scenario tends to assume we can maintain/grow the rate of carbon emissions indefinitely.

      However, the short term disruption of COVID demonstrated an immediate and pronounced drop in temperature based almost entirely around the reduction of industrial transportation (planes and cars, primarily) and subsequent drop in electricity demands due to a decline in global commerce.

      I see people insisting on the apocalyptic scenario while simultaneously clinging to this notion that we can keep cramming more particulate into the atmosphere unabated forever. It can’t be both.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          21 days ago

          That’s certainly better. But they all describe themselves in terms of high or low population growth.

          What happens when we mix low rates of reproduction with shrinking life expectancy. China and Japan are both experiencing population decline, while Europe is scheduled to join them in another decade.

          Countries facing harsh environmental or hostile military environments have seen even worse outcomes. Between 1991 and 2015, Ukraine lost 20% of its population. The war has only accelerated this trend.

          Gaza is on track to lose over 50% of it’s population, relative to 2023, before the end of the year. Libya, Syria, and Yemen are facing similar plights.

          The US is also in the early stages of a manufactured population crash, with drastic shifts in domestic policy curbing immigration sharply, spiking infant/maternal mortality, and ratcheting the risk of infectious disease spread. This, after COVID cleared over a million excess deaths inside two years.

          SP1 and SP3 both posit slow population growth. But neither posit the consequences of a more rapid and economically turbulent decline.