That gives.90 observed and 1.6
including warming in the pipeline.
Among other things, the author [of the Economist's report] hopelessly confuses transient warming (the warming observed at any particularly time) with committed warming (the total warming that you've committed to, which
includes warming in the pipeline due to historical carbon emissions).
Not exact matches
The plaintiffs
in the case, which
include several environmental groups and four western U.S. municipalities, argue that the federally supported projects —
including oil drilling,
pipelines, and commercial power plants — contribute to global
warming, which
in turn affects U.S. economic interests and its citizens.
In hopes that a subsequent paper may remedy this shortfall, one further seminal shift would seem worth
including, being a case for permafrost GHG contribution on top of the
warming from the best case of emissions control, specifically: — present realized
warming, — plus
pipeline warming, — plus
warming from phase - out emissions reaching near - zero by 2050, — plus a multiplier for the consequent loss of the fossil sulphate parasol.
They
included the following nifty graph, with the observed surface temperature but also the eventually expected temperature at the corresponding CO2 concentration (which they dub the» real global temperature»), based on different approaches to account for
warming in the
pipeline: