@jackofalltrades the alternative scenarios used in the early IPCC reporting were quite bad. Business-as-usual is just the null model. I would hope that the IPCC got that right.
What this shows is that we need better alternatives for the null model. And clearer pathways to implement them. Otherwise you'll open this figure again in 10 years and draw another red dot on the business-as-usual line. And we'll get more comments like "we're doomed. lolz".
@kta@jackofalltrades i find it really weird that the other scenarios in that report were more optimistic.
then again, we didn't have the idea of "tipping points", and maybe scientists were more optimistic about capitalism finding more creative ways to exploit and pollute, while putting governments into an arm-lock about restricting such tendencies.
For the base scenario they assumed that economic growth would continue and will be fueled by fossil fuels. Something that is true to this day, see this whole thread: https://mas.to/@jackofalltrades/110793069634402306
For the other scenarios they assumed the economy would still grow, but with some parts of it running without generating emissions. How? It wasn't for them to say.
The alternatives are well understood, but nobody wants to give anything up: neither the common folk, nor the big governments.
@jackofalltrades@meena -- We've given the old RCPs up. The new RCPs (which are more actionable) are so different, that we struggle with comparisons with predictions made against the older (AR4) RCPs (attached).
Regarding the alternative scenarios, I do think it's for us to say. All of us -- but climate scientists in particular -- need to play an active role in understanding and guiding the RCPs, so we can facilitate the transition away from fossil fuels.
The way I understand it, the problem is not that we can't figure out what to do or that we're not clear about it, but that we don't want to do it. Methods of reducing emissions are known to anyone interested in the topic. Yet it took 28 climate summits for the world leaders to acknowledge the need to transition away from fossil fuels. Citizens are equally ambivalent.
@jackofalltrades@kta i am convinced that (the majority of) citizens would be less ambivalent about it, if the political leadership was clear on the what and the how.
But all the transition timelines communicated seem to be plans made for a dream world.