I have performed a similar one, unsing
somewhat different assumptions, but arriving at a very similar answer.
With
somewhat different assumptions about how many parents switch from public to private and exactly who they are, the details of the analysis would be somewhat different.
The two staffers used
somewhat different assumptions but generated similar estimates: 133
Not exact matches
I'd read EREVN's various posts on medium.com and need to re-read to absorb the subtleties of his
assumptions and approach and how they differ from McClung's as they case a
somewhat different light on Prime Harvesting.
Cox et al.'s calculations were also based on another
assumption somewhat related to
different time scales for
different feedback mechanisms: a constant «heat capacity» represented by C in the equation above.
Modeling teams that fed
different plausible
assumptions into their computers got
somewhat different results for particular regions, although always overall global warming.
This makes the calculation for the budget
somewhat different, especially as net - negative emissions can cloud the
assumptions behind the relationship between cumulative emissions and warming.
The steepness of these reductions curves is
somewhat controversial because any calculation of a carbon budget which determines the steepness of the the needed reduction curve must make
assumptions about when positive feedbacks in the climate system will be triggered by rising temperatures, yet these controversies are reflected in giving
different probabilities about the likelihood of achieving a specific warming limit.