I'm working on a school project and wanted some different ideas and perspectives to answer this question for a presentation.

https://electrek.co/2024/11/29/2024-us-solar-with-record-32-gw-of-installations/

This surge comes off the back of a record-setting 2023 and is largely due to an anti-circumvention tariff moratorium set by President Joe Biden in 2022, which required imported solar modules to be operational by the end of 2024.

'Tariff moratorium'

60-second article summary:

https://bsky.app/profile/johnhatchard.bsky.social/post/3lc7726olz42o

https://www.wlrn.org/environment/2024-11-27/climate-change-rising-groundwater-study

There's a 60-second Bluesky article summary for any that are interested

https://bsky.app/profile/johnhatchard.bsky.social/post/3lc757ppiz42o

There is a group of people that folks usually label "climate change doomers". These people think that we will not reach net zero by 2050 and that the world is pretty much screwed. One half of the group believes that we will face an economic collapse, billions of deaths and a big portion of the earth becoming unlivable. The other more extreme half thinks that climate change will lead to total societal collapse and possibly even extinction.

I think both of these groups are wrong, and that we are on track of reducing emissions to meet or even exceed the goals.

Let's go over the major players first:

• China (the largest emitter) is ahead of schedule with Green Energy production and greenhouse gas reduction. It's crazy how fast they are transitioning to renewables. For example, solar power generation increased by 78% on one year. They now generate enough from Wind to power all of Japan. They manufacture 97% of the world's polysilicon solar panels and 60% of the World's Wind Turbines. They installed more Wind Turbines than the US or Europe. Energy generation from Coal decreased to 53% of overall generation this year and is expected to decrease below 50% next year i.e 47% of their electricity generation was provided by renewable energy.

• Russia is, well... Russia.

• EU and US are speeding up as well, especially with their new giant infrastructure bill. From what I've read they are exceeding expectations in funding and building of systems that will fast track them to net zero by 2040!!

Here's some raw data:

• Renewable energy sources account for 30% of global electricity production in 2024. That number is expected to jump to 70% by 2029!! The investments and progress in technology development along with deployment is exponential!

• Costs to build these systems have plunged. Price of solar PV has decreased by 85%. Price of batteries by 80%. Price of electric cars and charging stations by 40%. Again, as more investments flow in and technology improves this will also increase exponentially.

• In 2024 electric vehicles amounted to 23% of global car sales. This number according to Bloomberg articles that I've read is expected to jump to 60% by 2030!!

• More and more countries are planning to build nuclear. According to some opinion articles that I've read, if what EU, Chinese and US leaders are planning to do with nuclear and a possible fusion technology, we could hit net zero by 2035!

I could go on and on, the positive news just keep on mounting. Then you add AI advancements to all of that and things get even better.

What I'm trying to say here is: we WILL be fine. We may face some substantial consequences like another immigration crisis, food shortages here and there, and a medium sized hit to the economy, but nothing so bad that would lead to total economic/population collapse or other things these doomers are saying.

Environmental data is overwhelming, dispersed, difficult to connect, and always changing. Connecting and understanding massive geospatial datasets or complex meteorological information can feel impossible – and often stops developers and data scientists in their tracks

There is a vast amount of remote sensing data, measured in petabytes, that can be very complex to handle.  To use this data effectively for specific environmental objectives data scientists need to preprocess data, often employing artificial intelligence (AI) techniques for specific tasks, train AI algorithms, and develop deep learning models.

Environmental data is not well understood much less used as a strategic advantage. Developers that are tasked creating end-user applications that improve decision-making need to leverage data and insights across distributed data landscapes.

This is why IBM released Environmental Intelligence that provides an extensive set of APIs to easily ingest, process, and analyze environmental data. These tools enable integration of advanced analytics, AI, and machine learning into applications designed for environmental risk assessment, operational efficiency, and compliance with evolving sustainability standards.

Try it now for free https://www.ibm.com/products/environmental-intelligence/apis

Now trump is elected, there’s no doubt that we’re head-diving into climate change. We might as well prepare and adapt to it. Can you foresee liveable polar regions?

To me, Arctic is likely to become habitable, even quite pleasant. It is already owned by countries, so it’s more predictable. What about Antarctica? How do you see its future?

I mean a map that shows, in one look, most variables (temperature, precipitation, risk of drought, flood, human temperature niche, hurricane frequency, risk of wildfire, etc) across the whole globe combined in one, that summarizes what places today have been more affected by climate change and maybe what is predicted to happen in the near future.

just curious as a question

Regarding specially averages and world scale pressure systems, cause I know hurricanes will probably increase in frequency and intensity.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/this-new-yellow-powder-quickly-pulls-carbon-dioxide-from-the-air-and-researchers-say-theres-nothing-like-it-180985512/

What are the most interesting/ innovative VCs in climate right now?

This is what I know(I won't go into specifics): The gulf stream works because the temperature difference in the water between the poles and the equator is high enough. Since the temperatures are rising the poles are melting. Hence the temperatures between the equator and the poles is equalizing. Slowing down the flow of water. This system distributes warmth around the planet. If it collapses there will be less warmth coming up to the norther hemisphere and the northern hemisphere will cool down. Now this creates a high temperature difference between the poles and the equator.

Wouldn't that just restart the gulf stream?

After the collapse. The temperature around the planet will still try to equalize. But the water stopped. So the atmosphere has to move instead. Creating massive storms.

Now the time between the collapse of the gulf stream and the restart of the gulf stream. How long would that be?

Let's say that the collapse is not that far away. And that the restart would follow just a few years later. And we haven't stopped clime change by that time. Would that mean that the temperatures are still rising and the next collapse of the gulf stream is going to happen even faster? Making even bigger storms? And what after that? would there be more collapses and restarts? Happening faster each time? Making bigger storms?

I am a bit confused about this issue. The later part of the post is just my hypothesis. Based on no real evidence just my gut logic. Which is not right all the time. So please can someone give me some answers? Preferably someone who studies these things.

C

Just asking to convince someone

Imagine tipping the first domino in a long line. The initial push seems small, but it sets off a chain reaction where every piece falls in succession. In Earth’s climate system, tipping points work similarly. Cross a critical threshold—such as the melting of polar ice sheets or the destruction of coral reefs—and you trigger irreversible consequences like hastened global warming, rising sea levels, and extreme weather.

A recent study published in npj Climate and Atmospheric Science brings new urgency to these climate thresholds, revealing that the financial and logistical costs of reversing climate change skyrocket nearly fourfold after a tipping point is crossed. This groundbreaking research is the first to quantify the costs of intervening in climate tipping points, both before and after they occur, and the results are sobering.