A few weeks ago, a study by Copenhagen University researchers Peter and Susanne Ditlevsen concluded that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) is likely to pass a tipping point already this century, most probably around mid-century. Given the catastrophic consequences of an AMOC breakdown, the study made quite a few headlines but also met some skepticism. Now that the dust has settled, here some thoughts on the criticisms that have been raised about this study. ...
  • @red_october@reddthat.comEnglish
    6•8 months ago

    Going by everything else that we’ve seen as far as records being smashed and estimates being too conservative to be palatable to those who fund research, gonna have to say yes

  • @eleitlMEnglish
    4•8 months ago

    I’m currently in Norway, which is projected (don’t have a citation) to see a 8 K cooling as the result of the AMOC collapse. I don’t know how much warming Norway will have by 2050, presumably 2-4 K.

    Germany is expected to experience 2 K of cooling. So potentially the net result is around zero, ignoring probability of extreme events.

  • @spread@programming.devEnglish
    3•8 months ago

    Asked ChatGPT to tldr:

    The study suggests that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could reach a tipping point this century, potentially around mid-century. This has drawn both attention and skepticism. One argument is about the data used to describe AMOC changes. They rely on sea surface temperatures in a specific region, and various indicators seem to align with AMOC reconstructions. Another criticism is the assumption that AMOC behavior follows a quadratic curve near the tipping point. However, this assumption seems plausible based on historical models. Regardless of certainty, the focus is on minimizing risks by transitioning away from fossil fuels to prevent potential catastrophic consequences of an AMOC collapse.

    • @bamfic@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2•8 months ago

      They say century not decade. Mid century is 2 decades away.

      But scientists are the most conservative people I have ever met or worked with. They are almost certainly underplaying the timeline so as to make their conclusion more solid and defensible.