• Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Positive feedback loops, how do they work?

    We’ve known about this for decades. An example: heating causes permafrost to melt releasing CO2 and methane, which cause more heat to be trapped, which melts more permafrost, which releases more green house gasses, etc.

    Positive feedback loops tend to be very unstable, and can lead to runaway situations.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can’t wait for all those ice caps to go away and stop reflecting all the heat that they do reflect being white. It’ll just add to it.

    • grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      People are really bad at conceptualizing exponential change from feedback. Our brains expect incremental change. I think that’s one of the reasons people can’t know accept what is happening.

      “I know things are changing, but it’s only a bit each day, and it can go like that for years and it won’t be that bad.”

    • burgersc12@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The article goes out of its way to claim this isn’t the case. Theres a line that says something like there is no extra heat in the pipeline.

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        I followed the links in that quote:

        Climate models have consistently found that once we get emissions down to net zero, the world will largely stop warming; there is no warming that is inevitable or in the pipeline after that point.

        Neither addresses tipping points. They seem to talk about something else entirely, like wether a model assumes constant atmospheric concentration, or constant emissions, that kind of difference.

          • Spzi@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s so much wrong with comments starting with “So you …”.

            Yes, I’m not a climate scientist. I don’t have the time and energy to read all the relevant papers, nor do I need to do so to participate in the discussion on Lemmy. Sometimes I do, but I’m not obliged to, and you’re not in a position to judge.

            It’s great though that you read the paper. Can you support your claim with quotes from it? After all, I don’t trust random dudes.

              • Spzi@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Nah, that’s you. Oh, ok. I did not understand you wanted to point out that. This is confusing. Maybe you misunderstood my initial comment.

                I’m not agreeing with the quote from the article, but speaking against it.