Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I've posted this before about Paris, presuming every nation meets their targets (which frankly is very very unlikely of course).

How much of a difference will the Paris Agreement make? | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Assuming a climate system response to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions that’s of median strength, the three scenarios reduce the SAT in 2100 between 0.6 and 1.1 C relative to the “no climate policy” case. But because the climate system takes many years to respond to emissions reductions, in 2050 the SAT falls by only about 0.1 C in all three cases. Meanwhile, the rise in SAT since preindustrial times exceeds 2 C in 2053, and in 2100, reaches between 2.7 and 3.6 C — far exceeding the 2 C goal.

“The Paris agreement is certainly a step in the right direction, but it is only a step,” said Monier. “It puts us on the right path to keep warming under 3 C, but even under the same level of commitment of the Paris agreement after 2030, our study indicates a 95 percent probability that the world will warm by more than 2 C by 2100.”

Planet has just 5% chance of reaching Paris climate goal, study says | Paris climate agreement | The Guardian

Most countries aren't hitting Paris climate goals, and everyone will pay the price (nationalgeographic.com)
Most countries aren't hitting Paris climate goals, and everyone will pay the price (nationalgeographic.com)

Why can't we stop blaming politics and other stuff and start facing hard reality?

the three scenarios reduce the SAT in 2100 between 0.6 and 1.1 C relative to the “no climate policy” case.

Why can't we stop blaming politics and other stuff and start facing hard reality

It feels as if you aren't reading your own links

I read them carefully, and the say what I've been saying, very obviously.

But folks prefer to wave their hands and say "wind and solar" with no real plan, and no real chance of making a significant difference.

Meanwhile, the rise in SAT since preindustrial times exceeds 2 C in 2053, and in 2100, reaches between 2.7 and 3.6 C — far exceeding the 2 C goal.

If we had a policy that could have reduced COVID deaths by between 10 and 30 percent, that's roughly 300K to 1 million people. Not everything. Also not nothing.

Let's imagine Congress appropriates a lot of money to combat climate change, and over time, reports come in that the country isn't really approaching the goal of a 50% reduction in CO2 generation by 2030.  We can see that for European countries now, so it's not something we might not expect, it's pretty obvious when you look at numbers.

So, by 2028 say, it's obvious we're going to miss, rather badly.  What then?  People will become frustrated and fatalistic, instead of being told obvious truths NOW and given reasonable expectations.

China and India account for over 35% of carbon emissions

Its clear to me they have absolutely no intention of reducing carbon emissions

If it is to be a successful global effort they will have to get on board

Presicely

The Paris goals are insufficient.  They also won't be met.  "We" probably should face up to that fact.

So going full Amish or Native American is the only real workable solution?