Starting soon!

Put another way, only 25~35% of the warming caused by CO2 emissions comes from the initial CO2 emission, the rest comes from warming feedbacks: more water vapor, more CO2 & CH4 emissions (from oceans, soils, permafrost, etc.), lower cloud cover, etc.

Strange to have a documentary about how to live on Earth that doesn't focus significantly on GHG emissions and climate change. Yes, respecting & restoring nature is critical, but it won't matter much at +3ºC warming!

Starting soon!

You are assuming we are/will decarbonize due to concerns about climate. I don't believe that is happening. We switching to renewable energy because it is cheaper. That will still be true if we do SRM. Also, why should poor people suffer so you give more reason for wealthy people to decarbonize?

To survive, we need to do 4 things: 1) Phase out fossil fuel emissions ASAP (& fix land use changes, including cows) 2) Use CDR to remove past emissions 3) Implement Sunlight Reflection methods (SRM) to cool the Earth while we do 1 & 2. 4) Adapt, since impacts are already here and will get worse.

A million sounds like a lot, but we emit ~40 billion tons of CO2/year. The difference between a billion and a million is... a billion! Still, a million is on the way to a billion!

As I said, I'm optimistic that we can transition quickly, but I'm not optimistic that we will. If *policies* are put in place that require and/or pay for CDR, then it can happen at scale without relying on the fossil fuel companies.

The biggest barrier to emissions reduction is lack of public interest and lack of political leadership. We could be phasing out fossil fuels, but instead we are waiting for renewable energy to take over for economic reasons, without accounting for the devastating & deadly consequences of FF use.

Plus eliminating FF aerosols increases global temps by 0.5 to 1ºC right away, though this is supposedly offset by short-lived GHGs (eg, methane) going away after 12~15 years (which lowers global temps by ~0.5ºC). If we do SRM, we can have the methane cooling without the aerosol warming.

Note that 1460 Gt of CO2 storage available is 50% of our total emissions so far (2,800 Gt), and that storage does not include alternative sequestration types (mineralization, oceans, biochar, etc.) so there is tremendous total storage available.

The biggest risk -- by far -- is the path we are on to 3~5ºC warming later this century. That is "not compatible with an organized global community".

SRM just buys time to do ER & CDR. SRM *requires* that we also do ER & CDR, otherwise you must do SRM for ~3000 years without interruption and that ain't gonna happen!

SRM emissions reductions (through climate feedbacks) do not use any CDR CO2 storage. And there is far more CO2 storage available than needed. That paper was talking about limited "convenient" storage locations.

While I'm optimistic that we can lower emissions quite quickly, I'm pessimistic that we will. To lower emissions quickly, we need to *ban* fossil fuels over a relatively short timeframe (5 to 20 years, depending on the energy application). Many governments are "owned" by fossil fuel interests.

I'm for ASAP emissions reductions (ER) - see my 20-point climate action plan - but ER doesn't cool the Earth, it just slows how fast it warms. ER will *not* stop AMOC collapse at this point or other tipping points. Also, remember that SRM also significantly reduces emissions!

There won't be an ASAP rollout (we still need to build the planes with bigger wings and more engines) but we can do experiments starting soon. The problem with waiting is that we may (probably will) lose our ability to prevent crossing the AMOC and other tipping points.