Don't expect the public to pay, because many of them think this is all a scam to get more taxes out of them. I'd suggest reclaiming EVERY CENT of oil company profits since 1970.

We'll just keep kicking the can until we run out of road...

Live simply, so others may simply live.

The underlying message is: We're past 1.5, the carbon capture is a fart in a thunderstorm, let's mitigate but carry on drilling and clearing. Let's keep breeding and finding ways to keep very old and frail people alive and deny them the opportunity to be assisted to die with dignity. politics worldwide is totally controlled by massive mostly oil producing corporations. By refusing to concede that we're done, you just prolong the agony. I know! let's spend an huge amount on moon shots and space exploration! Don't do anything as we need more science! Oh, what's the point? Enjoy breathing in the crap they will spray into the atmosphere to seed clouds, without any idea of the unforeseen consequences...

Another Natalia Shakhova, BRAVO Anni! for showing how we all feel. Anger, sadness, hope & despair, fight and/or flight. Even if it is too late, you find your own place to make a stand so to preserve your own peace of mind.

It's too late; the amount of carbon about to be released from the Canadian boreal forest is so great that no amount of intervention can stop it at this point. The feedback loop is already here.

We already passed 1.5 didn't we?

It's probably safe to say that we won't be able to avoid the 1.5C threshold WITH interventions...

Crop yields are already on the decline. Climate Change is about food supply, first.

Any SRM scheme, must include how much heat is retained at night. It often outweighs the reflected Sunlight.

We love ourselves the most. Love may be the wrong word though. We fear suffering and will do most anything not to actually feel. The suffering most feared is not having all that we have been given and not being able to continue the habits and addictions of this industrial life.

James Hansen explained in simple terms what he calls the "Faustian bargain," which started, when talking about global warming, by having injected masses of aerosols in the atmosphere at the same time we increased CO2 levels. The first has a cooling effect, the second a warming effect. When burning fossil fuels as our industrial society does, the warming effect is largely prevalent. But what is also called the global dimming (this Faustain bargain) is a trap, as Hansen tells us, condemning us in the end to a massive failure. Aerosols are very short-lived, Co2 will last a very long time (between 300 and 1,000 years + all the feedback effects). So, there is no real way out. And here we go with the very dangerous fantasy of injecting huge quantities of sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere. Because there is nothing else; carbon capture is pure fantasy to deflect from the problem. Last year, the world released more CO2 than ever in the atmosphere, despite all the talk about "renewables," and 28 COPs. Since the first COP in 1992, 60% of all GHGs were released in the air. They were never serious about doing anything of a slight consequence while the science of global warming was well known by all. The idea that more "technology" with geoengineering can save us when all governments are so incompetent-or rather choose to advertize for evermore growth, using more and more energy (fossil fuels or needing fossil fuels to be processed), making more and more things directly based on fossil fuels again...When technology brought us were we are, on the verge of the precipice (J. Hansen couldn't be clearer about that, and he is right), why would we believe that: that technology will save us, in a crazy race forward, and honestly, out of desperation.

Behind the curve still. This is about Overshoot.

This is a very grim perspective of a future of which we either emerge as the stewards of a highly domesticated planet or we perish.

no more research 8 billion is too many.

We finally had rain along with wind and a mass of polar air and for the first time I saw the mountains from more than 200 km afar. The world looked beautiful for two days. I'd rather we cut emissions quickly and not add more.

Nice James Hansen-like hat! I totally trust your individual objective capabilities.

Why wasn't MEER mentioned!?

We had a chance to avoid the most destructive changes about sixty years ago and we had a good chance of mitigating some of the worst consequences of our reckless behavior but I believe we have passed the point where avoiding this climate catastrophe is possible rather our everts now need to be the survival of enough people to maintain the continued existence of the human species!

Spot on Anni.

It seems the most immediate concern might be the ocean circulation being lost with arctic ice gone. That might already be close to terminal because the circulation will be needed to distribute recycled nutrients like iron around the ocean. Without that I doubt iron fertilization is even feasible, losing co2 sequestration by the ocean.

LOL. We are already aproaching 2.0 above 1750 avg. You all keep using 1850 or so which is why you claim we have not hit 1.5. What a joke.

Annie has a bright future as a public speaker. That speech started off so hard. She only started to trail off at the very end, but i think she was nervous and tired and by then the adrenaline was crashing. Overall excellent job. The passion was electric to see.

No amount of intervention, at this stage, is going to prevent 1.5. This panel discussion is valuable to a point, but without discussing all relevant and plausible interventions, for example MEER's land-based solar reflectors, it is crippled, particularly when one of the only two possible interventions mentioned, SAI, is filled with problems, specifically those regarding safety, which is the type of "feasibility" problem we need to be most concerned about. As long as we exclude open and broad discussion of SRM, and keep it limited, as is done here, to "most popular" proposals, we are likely to remain stuck in the mire of group-think and will hear only those voices with the ability to shout louder than others.

Great points Anni Pokela

Person with high BP: Never felt better in my life. Why start on a pill? (Ten years later dies of massive stroke). Person learning about climate change: I am really enjoying these warm, snowless winters! (Ten years later…flooded coastal cities, unbearable summers, charred forests). AS HUMANS, WE ONLY REACT ONLY AFTER IT’S TOO LATE.

We are at 1.5 since last April we hit 2 a few times, next year we’ll pass the lying and the ignorant. I don’t watch when 1.5 is mentioned Check Paul Beckwith, Guy McPherson, Sam Corana, Margo’s healing corner and Jim Massa.

If the US in northern Europe thinks that climate migration is bad now, we haven’t seen nothing yet.

Powdered Olivine, at $2/ton, is the only removal process that makes any sense.

For the year of 2022 the global average surface temperature was 1.67 C an average calculated above the pre industrial average using the same baseline as used by the IPCC (1850-1900) plotted and calculated by Eliot Jacobson former mathematics and computing professor, now a self professed climate analyst. The same person who brought to our attention the sea temperature anomalies of plus 5 C off the coast of the UK in April of last year. Any talk now of us keeping to 1.5 is for the birds and in fact passed in 2022.. It's not far fetched for us to be 2.0C above this year is it!?

Apart from the first extremely monotone presenter this was a wonderful presentation; and thanks to everyone involved. This is a critical subject and it is irresponsible for climate scientists to advocate for anything other than major geoengineering interventions. The last scientist who stood up is a perfect example of that blindness. He thinks reduction of GHG is sufficient when the whole point of the presentation is that it is obviously not and we risk hitting many more tipping points with this insane approach. Its like he wasn't listening at all. We have to research and apply the best geoengineering approach to protect our planet now, there is no choice, and you only need common sense to see this.

We're so fked. Seems we would be in prepare for it mode.

Too bad you guys flew into Dubai instead of using Zoom.

I listened to this discussion on climate science and dietary habits never discussed. Those with this message of change are pandering to the crowd who don’t understand or believe or getting wealthier while climate change progresses for the worst.

2023 was 1.5 or more 2024 will be hotter you can bet on that

Your intro about the current state of Climate change was more honest and upfront than most IPCC reports ive looked at. Thankyou.

It seems clear that the "Great Simplification" is almost upon us. Soon things will get much more difficult for the poorest among us. Eventually our "civilization" will be gone for good. The natural world will adapt and continue to evolve but we have to wonder: "How many of our great grandchildren will be able to read or write?" This is merely an evolutionary adjustment. We should celebrate this outcome. Given all that our species has done, we should look upon ourselves as, possibly, the stupidest creature to ever walk on Earth. Time to move aside and let the other life forms carry on. Relax. This is all for the best.

The balloon SRM patent should be challenged at the ICJ or using imminent domain, to make it public domain.

I think Anni was very good.

Just next year will be all the data we need. Then we can watch most human's, go shopping in simple terms.

Massive, solar farms, massive offshore wind farms, and free universal birth control. That would be a good start.

The energy of solar panels can be increased by putting a glass panel of pressurized water above them. This is another area that should be researched because it would be very cheap to implement. Perhaps numerous panels could be stacked to increase the power enough that moonlight could power a solar panel too.

The spice must flow!

Save Our Planet Now!

There is a simple and humble solution, reducing the humans sphere, this increases the ecosphere, without any additional interventions.

When I suggest to friends to drive less, go solar, eat less meat products...they laughed, "Climate crisis is a hoax, CO2 is good for plants. Carnivore diet is healthy". Orange maga's legacy. 😢

World food production has been incredibly resilient to climate change damage, despite recent events. I wonder which extra molecule of CO2 released will finally cause a tipping point.

geoengineering is like taking a medicine for the liver and keep drinking absinth after that because 'we're cool now'

We are way past 1.5C compared to the true start of the industrial age 1750! In Australia it’ at 1.8C compared to the made up date of 1850. The IPCC admitted year ago we are in the midst of a global extinction event caused by run away irreversible global heating especially ocean top 2,000M temperatures which are off the scale. Habit failure for sure by 2030 we need scientists to tell the truth that we have all got very short lives indeed now! Better prepared than in shock - climate shock is everywhere all over the Earth! If we do act then we overheat even quicker due to the loss of sulfates etc suspended in the atmosphere dropping out and cooking us like a roast dinner!😊

Good job Anni!

1.5 is in the rear view mirror....2.5 is more likely, and immediate, not "decades" or even "centuries"....there comes a point where conservatism in science becomes a hindrance...that point is now.

A carbon credit scheme will not work, and is not the most efficient system with this scenario. Those administering the credit scheme will turn it into a enron trading ponzi scheme, we have seen this in Australia and the questionable enterprises buying cheap land and doing nothing and making claims of this or that without any benefit in terms of carbon capture. Personally listening to this talk I do not think emmissions talk is important anymore, we need actual carbon to be tied up in natural forests ( underground carbon capture will not work either as water travels though the substrata , most of the planet has been drilled/ mined/ fracked for resources and all these will make sequestering carbon underground incredible pointless) right now, no one on earth is actually sequesting carbon on any scale of importance and lowerring emissions will take too long and not actually reverse this process. I want action immediately not another summit. The most cost effective method will be to pay refugees to return to their homeland with a wage paid for by the wealthy countries of the world, fed by the world food aid programme, protected by the UN armed forces (again the wealthy countries need to committ to this wholeheartedly), and educated how to grow nature/ dig irrigation canals from lake victoria into kenya and ethiopia, manage permaculture systems, finish the aswan dam, and elevate their existence to semi-industrial farming from subsistence farming (and in payment for their wages to grow a percentage of their farmland into natural forests(or unnatural fast growing diversified forests if possible). This kind of idea can be utilised in other areas of the world also, I am just familiar with this particular place and some ideas will need adaptation to the specific case in other areas. Existing semi permaculture efforts in marginalised desertification at risk areas must also be enhanced and expanded. All houses in the world need to have their roofs painted white. The wealthiest countries on earth excluding china are all democracies, we need to simply tell our leaders what it is that we want, and it is not on TV inbetween the shows we watch, or in a political party. This issue is bipartisan, and also the system of governance does not matter (whatever your ism is demand action on this from your leaders). The other point is that the words/ terms you use to descibe these processes that are occuring/ failing do not impart the actual danger to peoples way of life EVERYWHERE, yes even wealthy countries will undergo drastic societal changes and migrations, and if we do not act NOW all will be lost eventually. Some societies may be able to hang on for a time but eventually all will undergo such drastic changes that many things we hold as granted will be no longer possible. Every day we waste now will astonomically increase the effort required adn the cost will also increase as we while away the days doing sweet F all abou this. Industry and envestment needs to fill vital deficiencies in this process, one being a renewabale arc reactor that can both smelt and recycle any material (I envision a fractionating column like arangement for metals. Ever battery ever produced by humanity is sitting in landfill waiting to be remelted and become functional again), turn it's back on building everything new for a throw away culture and committ to a product that is costed based on it's use, life span, impact on the earth and not it's ability to be made in a easily exploited country and recyclability. This is just my thoughts but the need to act now in a concerted effort WORLD WIDE and as a WORLD COMMUNITY (not competitors, customers, exploiters financially, military adversaries, religious apostates etc) is more imprtant than anything else. When I think about what will be required for survival alone in the nest decade I am worried. At 50 degrees celcius we will not be able to work outside without suffering kidney damage, malaria will afflict everyone as they migrate to the tropical areas due to desertification, all seas will have all year round cyclones/ hurricanes, rouge waves will increase in intensity and frequency, food sources will either migrate or be unavailable, water sources will be become both more dangerous due to flooding and droughts.

This is an excellent presentation. We must research these interventions. The risks were not well explained however. Knee-jerk resistance to this is wrong now. The situation is far too serious not to explore climate repair.

1.5 degrees won't be reached without Jim Jones Kool-Aid. but the guy who came up with 1.5 would say everyone but me since I came up with the idea.

Nothing said about reducing the human project in recognition that global warming is an effect of ecological overshoot. Trying to maintain BAU of growth while pretending to be concerned with climate is besides the point if the cause of problems is not known.

1.5 degrees is well and truly dead and buried. Not yet so that the data shows it, but enough warming is baked in to our atmosphere to effectively exceed that guardrail within the next 3 - 5 years, whatever we do. Staying within 2 degrees of warming is technically possible but would entail a rapid global mobilisation of effort and resources that simply doesn't seem feasible given today's fragmented and divided geopolitical landscape. Let's not forget that a huge expansion of oil drilling licensing is under way and the global population is still rising to the tune of 140 million births a year (that's another USA added to the global population every 2.3 years). Added to which, the political appetite for the depth of change needed to really deal with this issue simply isn't there, and if Trump gets in again, all bets are off. The best (most sophisticated) models suggest we're probably headed towards the 2.3 - 2.8 degrees of warming territory, and that's based on some quite optimistic assumptions (eg IPCC's fixation with CCS despite little progress in rendering the technology scalable and affordable over the last 20 years). James Hansen et al would argue that the upper range could be as much as 4 degrees, and to be frank, I think the assumptions that went into Hansen's models were far more realistic than the IPCCs somewhat 'hopium-infused' modelling. It doesn't really matter because even at the most optimistic end of this range, we're in very, very serious trouble.

Superheated water... Needs large amounts of energy... And that leads to more emissions or at minimum large amounts of materials to create the energy sources... And what does this do to weather patterns, ecosystems and so on... Not that straight forward thingy.

24:15 Prof. Martin Siegert seems to have not listened to one word or lack critical thinking so he is not behaving like a scientist but just emotional.

Why don't we try the haaarp its right there in Alaska it can charge the existing particles in the atmosphere to reflect the sunlight

To the man who spoke at 24 minutes-Bravo! I agree wholeheartedly. The only thing that will minimize the damage is a steep decline in the population of developed nations. Luckily, that is precisely what is expected to happen according to the UN.

Doesn't Planned Obsolescence mean unnecessary manufacturing? Doesn't that mean putting more CO2 into the atmosphere? So when/where have Climate Scientists pointed this out and suggested doing something about it? Doesn't Planned Obsolescence amount to planned Depreciation? When/where have economists discussed the depreciation of durable consumer goods, like automobiles? Where is the data on the annual depreciation of automobiles purchased by American consumers since Sputnik? We constantly hear about economics but economists and politicians do not suggest mandatory accounting/finance in the schools. Would consumers refusing to buy junk help to reduce CO2 emissions? Consumerism and Sustainability are not compatible!

Yes but now they pushing the goal post now we have to hit 1.5 multiple times to be considered over 1.5

Deader than a doornail.

Arkists must take the lead here and NOW! "Ribbon of Life Project" NOW!

Tic toc. Dealing with addicts so entrenched in the hierarchical order of disorder and so many desirous of such position is in my opinion insurmountable when one ponders the momentum and trajectory established today. Fear and loathing that has been indoctrinated in the modern mind replaced our ancient ability to discern real threats and solutions. Technology for the sake of novelty and instant gratification has numbed the sensitive connection to Mother Earth and the real world in a finite, yet dynamic example of entropy. Memories are but vapor in the vacuum of space when maybe the true age of intelligence occurs. ShakeUp XR

they talk like geoengineering (dimming of the sun) has not been going on a long time and i don't like the effects

I thought we hit 1.54 in 2023

There's no profit in not polluting the atmosphere. Just more yak about some silly paperwork. 97 tornados in one day? That ought to be a clue as to the reality of the new normal.

Pinatubo, was thousands of tons, maybe millions, and it was very high.

Start bikiing and walking more!

James Hansen sounding like Occupy!

We had 2°C warmer days in December, according to the World Meterological Organization---just 2, so far. How many 2° days do you suppose 2024 will bring; in 2025; etc. 7 plus billion people are going to starve, and quite soon. At 2°, the grain belts are 4°, according to the Ag. Dept. The land temperature is already 3.69°C warmer. Oceans bring the average down. Facts, not hopium, will lead us to adaptation nearer the Poles (Primates evolved in the trees, tiny ones, at 10°C PETM times. Keep that in the back of your mind. Guy M is wrong. Examine Geologic timescales, and realize we are warming 1000 plus times as fast. There is no time.

Way to go Annie you said that so beautifully

How can all these amazing people who care soooo much be missing the bigger conversation? That conversation is that climate change is a symptom of ecological overshoot. The Green energy revolution as being sold to us is a promise to continue with business as usual by other means... The focus on technical solutions alone is a gift to the fossil fuel industry. 40 years of failure and yet we still hear these conversations and nothing about ecological overshoot as the main cause... It means we need to reduce consumption, there are no negotiations on this... That's why emissions are growing, because consumption is growing with economic growth.

It is a facile and illogical argument to say that because technology got us into a predicament, that it should not be considered for an attempt to get us out. Or to use a quote from Einstein about trying to "solve problems at the same level of thinking that we were at when we created those problems.” He's referring to "levels", not techniques. Scientific logic dictates that we assess each situation on its merits, and not fall into emotional tantrums. Unfortunately, our political situations already give us too much of that. Those who are profiting from our imminent demise are gaslighting us in so many ways, and they have studied these methods for a century or more.

Glad I am old, we are doomed. 😢

Live close to work. Drive less.

You have to be pretty naive to think any of this matters, as nothing will be done. Corporations dictate policy, and do not care about externalities like the environment and people. Governments don't care about anyone except the corporations who back them. They aren't worried because they can live wherever they want and however they want regardless of whatever happens. The simple fact is fossil fuels are by far the most economically viable source of energy. That means more profits, which means they ain't stopping. So you can fancy yourself a "climate activist" if it helps you sleep at night. But you might as well move on and learn how to live with it, because it's already happening.

Well it's not up to a body of government RN. They do soak up plushies like they went to the beach. Tired of attention span looking like a forum ..ousting event it seems was key to feeling it hot

STEP #1: Explain how to deal with the demand for exponential growth. STEP #2: There is no step #2.

Geoenginering will starve people. We know that from the past when polution from US and Europe changed the rain fall in Sahel Africa. Milions of africans starved. We cannot do this for mitigating the consequences in our rich countries and put at risk milions in Africa and Asia. And for what? To do business as usual and consume fossil fuel energy to satisfy our greed? No, we need to change ourselves and consume less of everything.

I find it such a shame the people we are listening too have fossil fuel clothes on. What is the point of having an oil based hat on, a synthetic jacket etc, can non oil choices not be made in the people we are supposed to look too?

stopping this now, may in fact cause more problems that muddling through. This women would have been fantastic in 1995. Union of concerned scientists. carbon dioxide is non linear in its effects.. 600ppm is not any different than 1000 max warming is achieved.

Climate Repair is rebrand of geoengineering

What about the global freezing occuring actually?...

Mirrors are currently being tested, to reflect Sunlight, back into space. How effective it is against the Releigh Scattering, I do not know.

The underlying need to the damaging effects of capitalism and its effects to the planet - Really whether communism, socialism or capitalism the real problem is there are too many human beings living on the planet, but it seems that all of these global issues with the climate stem from the massive exploitation of Earth to support its equally massive population. This all seemingly has happened during the rise and fall of capitalism... However, a worldwide birth control so as the natural death rate surpasses the live birth rate until the human populations of the world fall under 1 billion (1800's levels), but ideally closer to population levels prior to the pre-industrial society. Starting with a 5 year stop birth worldwide.

We will be forced by the facts to try out geoengineering. If we like it or not.

Snowpiercer future or extinction , oh gosh

Yeah... we can't even get people to wear a stupid mask during a pandemic. lol! "Faster than expected!" Wheeeeee! It's gonna be _exciting!_ At about 20 minutes this just seemed like some kind of satire comedy skit.

Refreeze the arctic? G🌍D couldn’t do it but geo-engineering can?

More and more people are realising that CO2 emissions have little bearing on climate change. It doesn't take much searching to find out - unless of course your studying is restricted to one side of the discussion only.

Earth's climate is more stable, during Hothouse times---examine geologic timescales.

We are doomed