Pretty major caveat:

This linear relationship isn’t determined by any physical properties of the climate system, and probably won’t hold in much warmer or cooler climates, nor when other feedback processes kick in.

The argument that all of this is based on is proposed by one researcher, and it boils down to climate sensitivity currently counteracting the effects of carbon sensitivity roughly equally. So we know that the furthest extent this buffering influence will have is until the ocean stops absorbing roughly 90% of extra heat, which hits its own limit when the poles reach heat of fusion (and the ice completes the phase change to water).

At this point the land starts experiencing heat increases directly. It is considered a tipping point that will send climate change’s impact to a new order of magnitude, essentially. And tipping points are hypothesized to tip like dominoes - leaving the new equilibrium exponentially far away from the old climate.

Polar ice studies have been pretty dire lately. You will get various estimates, but an ice free Antarctic is quickly approaching. Regional crises could be observed even next year due to local influences of El Niño weather patterns. There is very real potential for virtually ice free poles by 2035. The way things are going, it could occur before 2030.

So let’s take the follow discussion and it’s citation. Let’s go ahead and suppose that stopping emission increases will slow the rate of warming, and that going to zero emissions will halt warming but not reduce it. Let’s suppose not of the minor limitations and exceptions come into play, and just consider that warming curve. (This wasn’t even the point of the follow-up article, the point was that the social challenges are greater than the scientific ones).

Can we stop all emissions by 2030? Or even 2035? Do we ever see that happening? Not just emission increases, but emissions altogether?

Because if we don’t, the poles melt and a heat bomb goes off. Somewhere between now and that point, ocean life dies causing huge areas to go anoxic and turn toxic, and food pyramids collapse.

Meanwhile we don’t have any carbon capture methods that are even theoretically viable, and scientists are starting to warn that that CC solutions will not arrive in time to prevent a collapse of civilization.

Thanks for pointing out the follow-up. It and the other presentation are worth a read, because it is good to inform yourself. But it’s also good to understand the limitations of a thesis. This buffering act will help us but it won’t be able to do so much longer. And we don’t even have a plan.

Comment my own thesis: If you’ve got an idea that’s less insane than filling the skies with sulfur dioxide, don’t let me slow you down for an instance. I just want to make sure that people understand the scope of the situation. It’s… quite very bad.