"Respondents across all countries were worried about climate change (59% were very or extremely worried and 84% were at least moderately worried). More than 50% reported each of the following emotions: sad, anxious, angry, powerless, helpless, and guilty. More than 45% of respondents said their feelings about climate change negatively affected their daily life and functioning, and many reported a high number of negative thoughts about climate change (eg, 75% said that they think the future is frightening and 83% said that they think people have failed to take care of the planet).

one of the 00:10:51 things is that our brains were set up for dealing with about a hundred people at a time living by our wits hunting and gathering and dying in the same world we 00:11:03 were born into for hundreds of thousands of years there's no concept of progress in our genes we just don't have it but like all animals we have an enormous set 00:11:17 of genetic apparatus to make us good copers anything happens to us we can find a way of being resilient about it and adapting to it we're copers and 00:11:29 adapters and so when we come up against difficulties our tendency is to cope with these difficulties it's like working for a company go into a company 00:11:42 and the company seems sort of screwed up maybe you can quit you can cope but your chances of actually changing the company are very low because nobody will listen 00:11:56 to reason right that is not what the company is there for they are there for their a task this is something that engelbart the inventor of the mouse pointed out years ago that companies are 00:12:10 devoted to their area a task which is what they think they were about most companies do not have a very good be process which is supposed to look at the 00:12:21 a tasks and make them more efficient but almost no companies have a see process which questions the tasks are our goals still reasonable our processes still reasonable that's the last thing it gets 00:12:35 question

how many people have seen curves that look like these progress against time right everywhere reading 00:48:14 scores test scores people love these yay oh no yay oh no it's bad because our 00:48:32 nervous system is only set up for relative change and in fact there's cause for cheering if that's the threshold but in fact for reading 00:48:43 threshold is this this is all oh no doesn't matter whether it goes up or not because there are many many things that where you have to get to the real 00:48:58 version of the thing before you're doing it at all in the 21st century it doesn't have help to read just a little bit you have to be fluent at it so this is a 00:49:09 huge problem and once you draw the threshold in there immediately converts this thing that looked wonderful into a huge qualitative gap and the gap is 00:49:20 widening and we have two concepts that are enemies of what we need to do perfect and better right so better is a 00:49:36 way of getting fake success we had improvement see it all the time it's the ultimate quarterly report we had improvements here and perfect is 00:49:51 tough to get in this world so both of those are really bad so what you want is what's actually needed and the exquisite skill here which I'm going to use these 00:50:06 two geniuses Thakur and Engels to labor it I'm going to call that the sweet spot the way you make progress here is you pick the thing that is just over that threshold that is qualitatively better 00:50:21 than all the rest of the crap you can do you can spend billions turning around and once you do that you widen up you give yourself a little blue plane to 00:50:34 operate in and for a while everything you do in there is something that is actually going to be meaningful

How Fast a Low Carbon Transition? Or: Is Vaclav Smil Wrong?

a big setback for the Republican-led states that have been suing the president over the metric, known as the social cost of carbon: a measure, in dollars, of how much damage results from emitting 1 ton of carbon dioxide. Being able to discuss the damage in terms of a precise dollar amount is important because it allows policymakers to show when the benefits of preventing global warming are greater than the costs. At some point it just becomes cheaper to switch to sustainable systems instead of coping with all the wildfires, floods, droughts, and heat waves that result from unsustainable systems.

let's put the electrical power systems together these electrical power 00:22:29 systems that this is actually on the low side because most industrial action happens with the consumption of coal and gas on site and then it's converted to energy on site this is what's just been drawn off the power grid 00:22:42 so there's a vast amount of energy associated with manufacturing that is not included here and that is actually a huge piece of work to include that so these numbers i'm showing you are very much on the low side 00:22:55 so we're going to put it all together we need 36 000 terawatt hours all there abouts that's a that's a very low estimate

assessment of extra capacity required of alternative energy electrical power systems to completely replace fossil fuels

This comes at a momentous time in Australia’s history as we confront the devastating consequences of whitefella knowledge systems and ways of thinking that have led inexorably to a combination of global warming and environmental degradation that is threatening the viability of human habitation in vast areas of the world.

Should something new be experienced, it will be unexpected, may beoverwhelming and may not fit into any meaningful representation or expression at all. The new assuch, the possible source of transformation, regeneration and vision, does not submit to the orderimposed by the personware, it is naturally on a collision course with it and a source to various degreesof cognitive dissonance. As such, it poses a threat that a well-functioning cognitive system mustmediate.

governance rather encompasses all localdecision-makers as well, as it is actually almost entirely within their own respective dominions ofcontrol where the overall success or failure is determined.

For example, in respect to the goal of reducing the global emissions of carbon dioxide, the relevantsystem of governance is not limited to those who conclude that there is a global risk, those whoaccept or reject the conclusion, those who formulate objectives, those who choose to adhere to or toignore them, who conceive of regulations, who choose to implement them or not, who determineprogress, decline or failures, those who select means by which to influence the desired local industrialinvestment, or consumption choices and so on.

Could social systems be finally reprogrammed, at long last, ‘as if peoplemattered’ [ 8]?

There are temperature ceilings that humans and mammals (and many other animals) cannot survive, if breached. What those limits are, and what happens when they are crossed, will have profound implications for agriculture and biodiversity in a warming world.

What happens if the world gets too hot for animals to survive? By Matthew Huber | July 20, 2022 

The projected timing of climate departurefrom recent variability

Although several studies have documented theareas on Earth where unprecedented climates is likely to occur inresponse to ongoing greenhouse gas emissions24,25 , our understandingof climate change still lacks a precise indication of the time at which theclimate of a given location will shift wholly outside the range of his-torical precedents.To provide an indication of the projected timing of climate depar-ture under alternative greenhouse gas emissions scenarios, we havedeveloped an index that determines the year when the values of agiven climatic variable exceed the bounds of historical variabilityfor a particular location (Fig. 1a). We emphasize that although ourindex commonly identifies future dates, this does not imply thatclimate change is not already occurring. In fact, our index projectswhen ongoing climate change signals the start of a radically differentclimate.

Climate is a primary driver of biological processes, operating fromindividuals to ecosystems, and affects several aspects of human life.Therefore, climates without modern precedents could cause large andpotentially serious impacts on ecological and social systems 1–5 . Forinstance, species whose persistence is shaped by the climate canrespond by shifting their geographical ranges 4–7 , remaining in placeand adapting 5,8 , or becoming extinct 8–11 . Shifts in species distributionsand abundances can increase the risk of extinction 12 , alter communitystructure 3 and disrupt ecological interactions and the functioning ofecosystems. Changing climates could also affect the following: humanwelfare, through changes in the supply of food 13 and water 14,15 ; humanhealth 16, through wider spread of infectious vector-borne diseases 17,18,through heat stress19 and through mental illness20; the economy, throughchanges in goods and services21,22; and national security as a result ofpopulation shifts, heightened competition for natural resources, viol-ent conflict and geopolitical instability23. Although most ecological andsocial systems have the ability to adapt to a changing climate, themagnitude of disruption in both ecosystems and societies will bestrongly determined by the time frames in which the climate will reachunprecedented states1

Ecological and societal disruptions by modern climate change are critically determined by the time frame over whichclimates shift beyond historical analogues. Here we present a new index of the year when the projected mean climate ofa given location moves to a state continuously outside the bounds of historical variability under alternative greenhouse gasemissions scenarios. Using 1860 to 2005 as the historical period, this index has a global mean of 2069 (618 years s.d.) fornear-surface air temperature under an emissions stabilization scenario and 2047 (614 years s.d.) under a ‘business-as-usual’scenario. Unprecedented climates will occur earliest in the tropics and among low-income countries, highlighting thevulnerability of global biodiversity and the limited governmental capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change.Our findings shed light on the urgency of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions if climates potentially harmful to biodiversityand society are to be prevented.

So what can we make of politicians who continue to argue that ‘1.5°C is still alive’? Are they misinformed or are they simply lying?I believe many are in denial about the types of solutions the climate crisis demands. Rather than do the – admittedly – very difficult political work of eking out our supplies of fossil fuels while accelerating a just transition to post-carbon societies, politicians are going all out on technological salvation. This is a new form of climate denial, which involves imagining large-scale carbon dioxide removal that will clean up the carbon pollution that we continue to pump into the atmosphere. While it may seem much safer to stick to the script and say that it is still physically possible to limit warming to no more than 1.5°C, while pointing out that the scale of change demands much more political will, I believe that this can no longer be a credible response to the climate crisis.We have warmed the climate by 1.2°C since pre-industrial periods. If emissions stay flat at current levels, then in around nine years the carbon budget for 1.5°C will be exhausted. And, of course, emissions are not flat – they are surging. 2021 saw the second-largest annual increase ever recorded, driven by the rebound in economic activity after Coronavirus lockdowns. We did not ‘build back better’.The clock has been stuck at five minutes to midnight for decades. Alarms have been continuing to sound. There are only so many times you can hit the snooze button.

We Need to Stop Pretending we can Limit Global Warming to 1.5°C

all kinds of regressions along the way um and there's many things that are getting worse um but for most um for most indicators of human well-being uh the world is in a 00:02:18 great trajectory and the last few centuries have been um a great direction uh however we're now confronted with a series of x-risks um or how uh david one of the 00:02:30 researchers in the um in our team likes to put public bads in extreme public baths that we have to have to really avoid and these especially the ones that are human caused um 00:02:44 present extreme challenges for us to get through and we we sort of control the speed at which we'll uh hit these uh but especially things like nuclear war and engineered pandemics and on ai 00:02:57 uh those kinds of risks

Chapter 5: Demand, services and social aspects of mitigation

dire warning

(a) What are the key levers and leverage points in social systems that might drive transformative change towards sustainability? (b) How are these derived from and perceived within and across academic literatures and in practice? (c) How might the levers and leverage points work together?

THE ECONOMICS OF IMMENSE RISK, URGENT ACTION AND RADICAL CHANGE:TOWARDS NEW APPROACHES TO THE ECONOMICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

The projected timing of climate departurefrom recent variability

Crop harvests for direct food use insufficient to meet the UN’s food security goal

the current global military buildup could represent a situation whereby many nations are entering, unconsciously or perhaps because there seems to be no other option, into a new type of mutually assured destruction (MAD) scenario, or even the Homo sapiens death spiral.

climate and environment change (CEC) hyperthreat

Schools and other public buildings in Italy will be forbidden from setting their air conditioning to any setting lower than 25C from next month, under a scheme intended to help the country dodge an energy crisis exacerbated by the war in Ukraine.

The flotsam and jetsam of our digital queries and transactions, the flurry of electrons flitting about, warm the medium of air. Heat is the waste product of computation, and if left unchecked, it becomes a foil to the workings of digital civilization. Heat must therefore be relentlessly abated to keep the engine of the digital thrumming in a constant state, 24 hours a day, every day.

Because of the invasion in Ukraine, “people are reminded of the problem, but then they resort to sort of quick fixes, which are not really for the long term,” says Rolf Wüestenhagen, director of the Institute for Economy and the Environment at the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland.

At a global climate meeting Monday, Ukraine’s representative, Svitlana Krakovska, pointed out the connection: “Human-induced climate change and the war on Ukraine have the same roots—fossil fuels—and our dependence on them,”

If humans, some humans, start making bad decisions and start destroying the institutions that kept the peace, then we will be back in the era of war with budgets, military budgets going to 20, 30, 40 percent. It can happen. It's in our hands.

I hope, for the sake of everybody -- Ukrainians, Russians and the whole of humanity -- that this war stops immediately. Because if it doesn't, it's not only the Ukrainians and the Russians 00:11:39 that will suffer terribly. Everybody will suffer terribly if this war continues. BG: Explain why. YNH: Because of the shock waves destabilizing the whole world. Let’s start with the bottom line: budgets. We have been living in an amazing era of peace in the last few decades. And it wasn't some kind of hippie fantasy. You saw it in the bottom line. 00:12:06 You saw it in the budgets. In Europe, in the European Union, the average defense budget of EU members was around three percent of government budget. And that's a historical miracle, almost. For most of history, the budget of kings and emperors and sultans, like 50 percent, 80 percent goes to war, goes to the army. 00:12:31 In Europe, it’s just three percent. In the whole world, the average is about six percent, I think, fact-check me on this, but this is the figure that I know, six percent. What we saw already within a few days, Germany doubles its military budget in a day. And I'm not against it. Given what they are facing, it's reasonable. For the Germans, for the Poles, for all of Europe to double their budgets. And you see other countries around the world doing the same thing. 00:12:58 But this is, you know, a race to the bottom. When they double their budgets, other countries look and feel insecure and double their budgets, so they have to double them again and triple them. And the money that should go to health care, that should go to education, that should go to fight climate change, this money will now go to tanks, to missiles, to fighting wars. 00:13:25 So there is less health care for everybody, and there is maybe no solution to climate change because the money goes to tanks. And in this way, even if you live in Australia, even if you live in Brazil, you will feel the repercussions of this war in less health care, in a deteriorating ecological crisis, 00:13:48 in many other things. Again, another very central question is technology. We are on the verge, we are already in the middle, actually, of new technological arms races in fields like artificial intelligence. And we need global agreement about how to regulate AI and to prevent the worst scenarios. How can we get a global agreement on AI 00:14:15 when you have a new cold war, a new hot war? So in this field, to all hopes of stopping the AI arms race will go up in smoke if this war continues. So again, everybody around the world will feel the consequences in many ways. This is much, much bigger than just another regional conflict.

This is a moment that we should seize, in all seriousness, in order to take on the two huge existential plagues that face us this morning: the climate crisis, outlined in this new IPCC report, and the fact that we have a madman with nuclear weapons who’s used the revenues from oil and gas to intimidate and terrify the entire world.

(For comparison, most organizations can’t avert a metric ton for less than $2. The average American causes around 16 metric tons of emissions per year.)

The Founders Pledge report used countries’ climate targets and projected policies to estimate how many metric tons of carbon can be saved by avoiding various lifestyle choices.

அண்மையில், The Tallest Story, Can the novel handle a subject as cataclysmic as climate change?  என்ற கட்டுரை படித்தேன். நான் உங்கள் தளத்தை தொடர்ந்து படித்து வருவதால் உங்கள் வாசகர்கள் விரும்பிப் படிப்பார்கள் என்று தோன்றியது. என்னுடைய மூலத்தை சற்று மாற்றிய சுமாரான தமிழ் வடிவம்:  வைகுண்டம் https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_fiction வானிலைப்புனைவு – [cli-fi The Tallest Story] 

Markets are politically regulated institutional processes far removed from idealized, perfect competition, and prices are negotiated between small numbers of powerful brokers (84) involving hidden subsidies, e.g., for infrastructure

If booksellers like to blame publishers for books not being available, publishers like to blame printers for being backed up. Who do printers blame? The paper mill, of course.

In comparison, the average household energy use for gas heating in Belgium – which has a moderate climate – is 20,000 kWh per year. Assuming that the average Belgian heating system is used for six months per year, daily energy use corresponds to 109.6 kWh per day. This energy could heat roughly 900 water bottles per day – enough to keep the whole neighbourhood comfortable.

Cryptocurrencies are not only an apocalyptic ecological disaster

Extinction Rebellion has been at the forefront of a fundamentally new message which is if a government doesn't change, it's your right and as we've identified, your duty, if you're not going to be complicit, 00:34:43 to go into a rebellion a nonviolent civil disobedience against the government in order to fundamentally reduce carbon emissions. It's not actually that complicated, Is it? If you ask the average person who controls the economy, right? They know it's the banks, the big banks, right? And we had the banks, I think they did it pretty deliberately ten years ago. 00:35:12 They pulled our chain and we had the most massive transfer of wealth that the world has ever seen the bank bailout, right? Trillions and trillions of dollars. We're seeing the same thing now with covid and the banks have got to be behind it, right? If the banks wanted and decided that emissions have to decline from today 00:35:36 fast in a matter of years, the banks can do it, right? Because the banks hold the strings. All governments now are in a massive amount of national debt . we have an axis of evil if you want, we have the big banking corporations. We have the big fossil fuel corporations and we have the compliant government.

for example arctic char the fish species that's already 00:09:00 all across the arctic region living at its temperature level about 24 degrees celsius in freshwater ecosystems one fraction of a decree further and we 00:09:13 will enter into a cycle of fish death events that will cascade in food security loss of culture and many other things of this keystone species on the aquatic ecosystems for 00:09:25 communities and nature alike

she pointed out that climate finance to small island states declined by 25 percent in 2019 but she also offered 00:22:36 what she called a sword that can cut down this gordian knot of finance and she reminded us that 25 trillion dollars of quantitative easing has been produced in the last 13 years and that 9 trillion 00:22:49 of that was just in the last 18 months alone in order to deal with the covet crisis an annual increase in special drawing rights of 500 billion dollars a year for 20 years putting trust to finance the 00:23:01 transition is what she suggested is the real gap that we need to close not the 50 billion being proposed for adaptation and she concluded by saying if 500 billion sounds big it's just two percent 00:23:14 of that 25 trillion dollars that has already been created through quantitative easing so my question is is actually not an economic question it's more of a political question really what are the barriers to using that mechanism for the 00:23:28 enormous threat of climate change in the way it's been used for the frankly lesser threat of of covid and what can be done to build support for it

i 00:35:57 think that's really important but i want to come back to a bigger issue which is the lack of the hundred billion dollars and also loss and damage and i think that actually goes back to a lack 00:36:09 of knowledge and education in the developed world about our history and i think this is incredibly important that we need to think not just about the science but actually educating people 00:36:20 about colonization about how much we've actually admitted i think that if we can get the developed world to actually understand uh the crimes of our past to 00:36:32 be able to understand why there is this trust issue i think that's actually critical and it sounds really strange to deal with history to actually save the planet to deal with climate change but 00:36:44 i've become more convinced having heard politicians who supposedly studied history and politics at university must admit it was a very strange small oxford university you know they're not very 00:36:56 good but again i think we really have that whole education piece to do before we can acknowledge those crimes and move forward

if the trust equation is undermined then there is little hope that the 00:15:22 integrity of the carbon equation will be maintained

arctic fox is now gone it's no longer nesting in in 00:09:38 finnish army and arctic areas and uh its habitats are overtaken by red fox more southern and boreal species so the species on the move is one of the factors that's really altering the kind 00:09:51 of life that we know here

Trans Mountain said there have not been any oil leaks due to the flooding, which has triggered an emergency shutdown of the pipeline lasting longer than any previous stoppage in its nearly 70-year-history.

The climate catastrophe we're facing is the result of three issues, three processes.

we believe that knowledge must be shared in order for humanity to survive and thrive—and that it is essential to help fight climate change.

The open movement must develop a clear and deep relationship of collaboration with the climate movement, most importantly because the latter is the locus of political renewal and connection of an intersectional approach to action and change.

What resources are powering our projects and how do we manage those resources? Are we willing to approach our work with a set of values that centers several generations after us? And how do we do that?What protections do we need to fight for in the workplace to hold companies accountable around climate justice goals?How do we measure our impact on the climate crisis?Are we willing to sundown projects if mitigating their negative impact on the environment is impossible or creates little impact?

ns often accounting for the highest

Poultry scientists have also succeeded in selecting for parthenogenesis, increasing the incidence in Beltsville small white turkeys more than threefold, to 41.5 percent in five generations. Environmental factors—like high temperatures or a viral infection—also seem to trigger poultry parthenogenesis.

Lowering these risks and adapting to those we can no longer avoid will require a mobilisation of resources on the scale of a war economy.

e.g. Idea from Yuval Harari’s Sapiens that Europe and Asia developed better civilisation than Americas because Americas span vertically lot of climates making it harder to share agriculture progress between different climates.

there’s a group of us who are figuring out what this Centre for Climate Justice is going to be and what its scope is going to be.

A recent survey found that only 14% of people they surveyed in the United States talk about climate change. A previous Yale study found that 35% either discuss it occasionally or hear somebody else talk about it. Those are low for something that over 70% of people are worried about.

For a talk at one conservative Christian college, Dr. Hayhoe – an atmospheric scientist, professor of political science at Texas Tech University, and the chief scientist for The Nature Conservancy – decided to emphasize how caring about climate change is in line with Christian values and, ultimately, is “pro-life” in the fullest sense of that word. Afterward, she says, people “were able to listen, acknowledge it, and think about approaching [climate change] a little differently.”

I was speaking in Iowa, and I was asked, “How do you talk to people in Iowa about polar bears?” I said, “You don’t; you talk to them about corn.” If we begin a conversation with someone with something we already agree on, then the subtext is: “You care about this, and I care too. We have this in common.”

I am frequently shamed for not doing enough. Some of that comes from the right side of the [political] spectrum, but increasingly a larger share of that shaming comes from people at the opposite end of the spectrum, who are so worried and anxious about climate impacts that their response is to find anyone who isn’t doing precisely what they think they should be doing and shame them.

When we practice active hope, when we look at what people are doing, and we share those stories with others and talk about what we can do together, then we realize that the boulder is already at the top of the hill and is rolling down in the right direction, and has millions of hands on it. It’s just not going fast enough.

Fundamental features of human psychology can constrain the perceived personal relevance andimportance of climate change, limiting both action and internalization of the problem. Cognitiveshortcuts developed over millennia make us ill-suited in many ways to perceiving and respondingto climate change (152),including a tendency to place less emphasis on time-delayed and physicallyremote risks and to selectively downplay information that is at odds with our identity or worldview(153). Risk perception relies on intuition and direct perceptual signals (e.g., an immediate, tangiblethreat), whereas for most high-emitting households in the Global North, climate change does notpresent itself in these terms, except in the case of local experiences of extreme weather events.

The fossil fuel industry helped to create the PR industry, and publicists came up with disinformation and manipulation tactics that they deployed for oil, tobacco, and chemical companies for decades.

The climate of Japan is predominantly temperate but varies greatly from north to south. The northernmost region, Hokkaido, has a humid continental climate with long, cold winters and very warm to cool summers. Precipitation is not heavy, but the islands usually develop deep snowbanks in the winter.[85]

Global air traffic is expected to double to 8.2 billion passengers in 2037, according to IATA, which predicts that aviation's 2019 emissions peak of around 900 million metric tons of CO2 will be exceeded within the next two to three years.At the same time, the window to cut the world's reliance on fossil fuels and avoid catastrophic changes to the climate is closing rapidly. The International Energy Agency forecasts that aviation's share of global carbon emissions will increase to 3.5% by 2030 from just over 2.5% in 2019 in the absence of efforts to further decarbonize.

Since about 70% of water delivered from the Colorado River goes to growing crops, not to people in cities, the next step will likely be to demand large-scale reductions for farmers and ranchers across millions of acres of land, forcing wrenching choices about which crops to grow and for whom — an omen that many of America’s food-generating regions might ultimately have to shift someplace else as the climate warms.

The tunnel far below represented Nevada’s latest salvo in a simmering water war: the construction of a $1.4 billion drainage hole to ensure that if the lake ever ran dry, Las Vegas could get the very last drop

No one but Humboldt had looked at the relationship between humankind and nature like this before.

rare for lightning to strike at all in Iqaluit.

Limiting warming to 1.5°C implies reaching net zero CO2 emissions globally around 2050 and concurrent deep reductions in emissions of non-CO2 forcers, particularly methane (high confidence). Such mitigation pathways are characterized by energy-demand reductions, decarbonization of electricity and other fuels, electrification of energy end use, deep reductions in agricultural emissions, and some form of CDR with carbon storage on land or sequestration in geological reservoirs.

Pathways that aim for limiting warming to 1.5°C by 2100 after a temporary temperature overshoot rely on large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, which are uncertain and entail clear risks.

Limiting warming to 1.5°C depends on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the next decades, where lower GHG emissions in 2030 lead to a higher chance of keeping peak warming to 1.5°C (high confidence). Available pathways that aim for no or limited (less than 0.1°C) overshoot of 1.5°C keep GHG emissions in 2030 to 25–30 GtCO2e yr−1 in 2030 (interquartile range). This contrasts with median estimates for current unconditional NDCs of 52–58 GtCO2e yr−1 in 2030.

Ultimately, having access to the top political decision makers and using biased studies, the industrial lobbies have managed to sabotage the reforms the Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat called for. A context and tactic we are only too familiar with.

the climate movement is also structurally vulnerable to doomist intellectuals who claim that science supports their ideas.

71% of global emissions can be traced back to 100 companies,

C.1.3. Limiting global warming requires limiting the total cumulative global anthropogenic emissions of CO2 since the pre-industrial period, that is, staying within a total carbon budget (high confidence).1414By the end of 2017, anthropogenic CO2 emissions since the pre-industrial period are estimated to have reduced the total carbon budget for 1.5°C by approximately 2200 ± 320 GtCO2 (medium confidence). The associated remaining budget is being depleted by current emissions of 42 ± 3 GtCO2 per year (high confidence).