Hansen’s linear fit models still underestimate the path we are on for one simple reason: the rate of warming is not a constant, it is accelerating. Richard Crim was someone who understood that. Things are getting worse, faster.
I had a DM from a relative I believe that said he had died. He talked about his illness (without specifics).
Richard’s analysis of the paleontological record suggested that the increase in temperature increase associated with a doubling of CO2 was actually 8 C. I am pretty sure his analysis of the current acceleration in the rate of warming would be the climate “catching up” to the rate of CO2 forcing combined with the decrease in reflectivity of the Earth (increased absorption of solar energy).
Thanks. I have been digging once again to understand what happened to Richard. It's weird I can't find an obit. In this article he explained he was autistic. I also know he held degrees from Berkeley in the 1970s. Perhaps I can find more by calling the school.
RCP 8.5 has been declared done as it was predicated on burning far more coal. However, Richard was certain of 3° C by 2050, and I suspect he will be correct about that.
Yes, the Earth is absorbing more energy as ice melts. A Blue Ocean Event appears inevitable now. We likely have little control if we were trying to change course, but we're not even doing that. Pathetic.
All of Richard’s content is still on Substack. I have just been going through it again trying to find the article where he was trying to pin down the correlation of temperature to CO2. He cites a Standard and Poor’s analysis that gives a 50% chance of 2.3 C increase by 2040 as evidence aligning with his prediction of 2 C by about 2035. But I would like to get my eyes back on his paleontological research!
My understanding of Hansen’s work is that it is all based on the assumption that emissions from human activity stay the same, ie stop increasing, which is clearly not the case.
The IPCC should have done an RCP10 pathway.
Isn’t it the case that all of their “pathways” assume a huge amount of CCS being introduced?
I don’t think that is quite correct about Hansen—he is very careful to base his models on actual observations (as opposed to assumptions that are often incorrect, baked into other climate models). The tl;dr of Hansen’s analysis imo is this—“based on observations to date this is the likely path going forward.”
The IPCC modelling does assume a role for CCS, but it is the fossil fuel industry that is really pushing CCS which to date has been unable to prove it can work at any kind of scale required to move the needle..
I remain stunned that no one in public media is putting two + two together in their daily reports of extreme weather. It was only a year or so ago that reports of damaging weather became a daily feature of the news. Any similar set of recurring tragedies that become part of the daily news would (or should) spur commentary on how to stop the trend. We're the proverbial frogs in heating water.
Thanks Sarah. We (the world) are sleep walking into a double whammy. Severe food, fuel and resource shortages due to the Strait of Hormuz being shut down and the Global warming super rise. If deisel supplies reduce drastically, then shipping reduses drastically removing more sulphur from the atmosphere. We saw what happened with the reduction in sulpher from shipping deisel in 2023/24. Add a super el nino to the mix plus what is already baked in.
We are already at 1.64 deg C above the 1750-90 base line.
Hansen’s linear fit models still underestimate the path we are on for one simple reason: the rate of warming is not a constant, it is accelerating. Richard Crim was someone who understood that. Things are getting worse, faster.
Crim was a major loss to our community. He parsed the science better than anyone else I'm aware of.
Crimsters everywhere unite!
What has happened to Richard Crim, please?
I had a DM from a relative I believe that said he had died. He talked about his illness (without specifics).
Richard’s analysis of the paleontological record suggested that the increase in temperature increase associated with a doubling of CO2 was actually 8 C. I am pretty sure his analysis of the current acceleration in the rate of warming would be the climate “catching up” to the rate of CO2 forcing combined with the decrease in reflectivity of the Earth (increased absorption of solar energy).
Thanks. I have been digging once again to understand what happened to Richard. It's weird I can't find an obit. In this article he explained he was autistic. I also know he held degrees from Berkeley in the 1970s. Perhaps I can find more by calling the school.
https://richardcrim.substack.com/p/if-you-dont-know-this-about-me-yet
RCP 8.5 has been declared done as it was predicated on burning far more coal. However, Richard was certain of 3° C by 2050, and I suspect he will be correct about that.
Yes, the Earth is absorbing more energy as ice melts. A Blue Ocean Event appears inevitable now. We likely have little control if we were trying to change course, but we're not even doing that. Pathetic.
All of Richard’s content is still on Substack. I have just been going through it again trying to find the article where he was trying to pin down the correlation of temperature to CO2. He cites a Standard and Poor’s analysis that gives a 50% chance of 2.3 C increase by 2040 as evidence aligning with his prediction of 2 C by about 2035. But I would like to get my eyes back on his paleontological research!
This isn’t the post I was thinking of but it is close
https://substack.com/@smokingtyger/note/c-156825828?r=fjrpt&utm_source=notes-share-action&utm_medium=web
He passed away in November after a bought of sickness.
https://substack.com/@smokingtyger
I tried to find an obit without success.
If anyone knows more, that would be appreciated.
My understanding of Hansen’s work is that it is all based on the assumption that emissions from human activity stay the same, ie stop increasing, which is clearly not the case.
The IPCC should have done an RCP10 pathway.
Isn’t it the case that all of their “pathways” assume a huge amount of CCS being introduced?
I don’t think that is quite correct about Hansen—he is very careful to base his models on actual observations (as opposed to assumptions that are often incorrect, baked into other climate models). The tl;dr of Hansen’s analysis imo is this—“based on observations to date this is the likely path going forward.”
The IPCC modelling does assume a role for CCS, but it is the fossil fuel industry that is really pushing CCS which to date has been unable to prove it can work at any kind of scale required to move the needle..
Here's a link to Hansen's paper as an alternate to the PDF. Thanks for the synopsis, Sarah.
https://jimehansen.substack.com/p/yes-2026-is-on-track-to-be-the-hottest
Thanks once again for giving us this heads-up Sarah. Jeez, my brain hurts!
Mine too!
I really hope 🙏 we substackers will do as Sarah just did here.. restack Dr Hansen and network his plea of the heat coming is worse than advertized.
As Earth 🔥..
I remain stunned that no one in public media is putting two + two together in their daily reports of extreme weather. It was only a year or so ago that reports of damaging weather became a daily feature of the news. Any similar set of recurring tragedies that become part of the daily news would (or should) spur commentary on how to stop the trend. We're the proverbial frogs in heating water.
Appearances can be deceiving.
Thanks Sarah. We (the world) are sleep walking into a double whammy. Severe food, fuel and resource shortages due to the Strait of Hormuz being shut down and the Global warming super rise. If deisel supplies reduce drastically, then shipping reduses drastically removing more sulphur from the atmosphere. We saw what happened with the reduction in sulpher from shipping deisel in 2023/24. Add a super el nino to the mix plus what is already baked in.
We are already at 1.64 deg C above the 1750-90 base line.