A high growth, low emissions model. Courtesy of EN-ROADS climate simulator.
En-ROADS (climateinteractive.org)
Go wild!
2 Likes
Lol, you’re going to collapse the world economy. Or maybe not.
1 Like
But mother nature loves me
1 Like
My GWP ended up at ~$4.1 quadrillion by 2100, my surplus was ~28 trillion (co2 tax v en subsidies only), per capita gdp was ~$300k for world avg (max-china-$1.4 mil, min africa $69-70k) and the market price of electricity was $0.06 per kw/h in 2100, with a 16 year above baseline spike between 2023-2039. What about yours?
Now dumb down so I can understand what you are saying
1 Like
How much money you got, how much you saved? How expensive is the buzz-buzz electricity?
Good question
1 Like
The line be like weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
2 Likes
Lolski, better let them know that their sim has the glitches that you exploited, what were the glitches? They may have contributed towards my favourable results as well!
1 Like
Destruction of ze world economy.
1 Like
There are certain combination of variables where small shift can make strong changes to final temperature.
2 Likes
Who knew?! Thanks for letting us know! I imagine that those number probably revolve around the coal.
1 Like
Moderate Growth-Low Emissions
At those values, they’ll need to model lots of human fatigue, drowsiness, wooziness. At 9% CO2 concentration in air, a lot of things will get very tough.
I also see how you’ve manipulated all the values. And that’s how you got these results. This kind of ultrawarming would probably be impossible, although it has happened once in the World, when crocodiles roamed the arctic, but it wasn’t on the timescale of decades.
Even maxing out population and GDP growth it doesn’t increase temperature by much.
1 Like
Also wetbulb temperatures being persistently lethal on huge area
It simulates fall of GDP as temperature rises (can be turned on in assumptions), I guess they could do it for population too.
1 Like