Everything but taking care of the cause? Pollution. Deforestation. Etc. Here’s a good start: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss...
In particular, the figures in chapter 2 are particularly informative.
We are going to need to start sequestering carbon in the later part of this century, with as of yet unknown methods, but it's doable.
I would caution that climate scientists have been generally too conservative in their predictions, and there's substantial risk that they have missed something that could make warming much worse than we expect. (I would consider a 1% chance of much worse warming to be a substantial risk, I purchase insurance for far rarer risks than that.)
Additionally scientists have been overly optimistic about how much and how rationally society responds to the risks.
So in general I would say we are in somewhat worse shape than the SR1.5 report says, but there's no evidence of that, it's just analyzing the situation using standard risk modes rather than getting point estimates and confidence intervals on the best evidence.
Seems like a good opportunity to kill two birds with one stone here with the climate and housing crises if we just plant trees and turn them into apartments.
At some level it would be a complete and utter disaster and it's not clear where that is. I think if we could magically reach net zero tomorrow, we'd be mostly fine. Obviously instead we will continue driving full speed towards the edge of the cliff, hidden somewhere in the darkness. I hope we apply the brakes earnestly and soon.
As of now, we're still increasing our speed. Global CO2 emissions go up every year.
Anything that I find says the speed of increase has been decreasing almost steadily since 2008, and 2019 had a decrease in total emissions compared to 2018 (and whatever series I find, it never goes beyond 2019).
Yeah, that's a single point. The overall trend looks like it's a methodology fluke, and that the real trend is of 0 growth.
That's why I'm interested on more data :)
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gl_gr.html
Lower growth may also be corellated with human depression, strife and war. So the human systems are working against decrease of CO2 growth.
We have already committed to levels that I consider catastrophic. Particularly in the oceans, where CO2 partitioning into the oceans is bleaching coral and the habitats they create. In the terrestrial habitats, desertification widespread and rapid.
The long-term solution offered to us by the Earth system is getting carbon below the carbonate compensation depth to be buried, or at least dissolved into the entire ocean, and not just surface waters. But the ocean overturning time is 500 years, and our timescale is somewhat shorter.
I think how you look at catastrophe solely from a perspective of civilization is wrong, but even from the perspective of a state, things like the drought that caused the famine that caused the civil war in Syria which caused a refugee crisis in Europe are troubling. Imagine how much worse it will be when a massive typhoon hits Bangladesh. But from a human perspective people are already suffering loss of income, home, and lifestyle from climate-exacerbated natural disasters. And the biosphere has been hit hard — adaptation will happen, but the mass extinction means we will lose ecosystem services that will be hard to replace.
We need to restore 350ppm asap. Meaning carbon negative.
I know you know this. Just expounding for the lurkers.
Given the potential to end civilization, I feel any outcome short of that is a win of some kind. Even if the consequences are still severe. I also have serious doubts that we'll actually remove enough carbon to stay under 1.5 degrees of warming. We may just have to live with the consequences. I definitely don't mean to imply in any way that things will be just like normal. It's going to get rough.