Talk:2024 in climate change

Proposed guidelines

This section is an excerpt from Talk:2020 in climate change § Proposed guidelines.[edit]

Proposed guidelines

This article is envisioned as one of a series documenting year-by-year occurrences pertaining to climate change. The series of articles will provide annual "snapshots" and "status updates" for future historians to determine "what was known, when" and "what happened, when".

1. Post content that is specific to a particular year. The yearly status of ongoing phenomena or actions is acceptable, but general scientific principles and expansive historical reviews are inappropriate here.
2. Make the text concise. (Background information, general principles, technical definitions, etc., should be put within citation footnotes, in the "Notes" section, or in other Wikipedia articles.)
3. Though Wikipedia is not a newspaper, individual events that were important in the then-current year may be appropriate.
4. Keep each entry brief, ideally a sentence or two.
5. Keep content organized in meaningfully titled sections (listed below)—not one long list.
6. Within each section, strive to arrange entries chronologically.
7. Strive to maintain section titles consistent in articles from year to year.

Initial section structure:

• Summaries — (prominent-source surveys putting the year in perspective)
• Measurements and statistics — (raw numerical values)
• Natural events and phenomena — (natural occurrences contributing to or resulting from climate change)
• Actions and goal statements (actions by humans; subsections:)

• Science and technology (e.g., measurement techniques, renewable energy technical advances, expeditions, etc.)
• Political, economic, legal, and cultural actions (causing or resulting from climate change)
• Mitigation goal statements — (e.g., climate emergency declarations, NDCs, net zero pledges, ...)
• Adaptation goal statements — (statements re coping with expected effects of climate change)

• Public opinion and scientific consensus — (scientific consensus studies, studies of public perceptions, etc.)
• Projections — (predictive estimates of future causes, effects, etc.)
• Significant publications — (major publications by prominent sources)
• See also — (links to other Wikipedia articles)
• Notes — (e.g., technical explanations not suitable for body text)
• References
• External links

—RCraig09 (talk), begun 06:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

—RCraig09 (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

First 12 months above +1.5 C

Current text needing some finetuning: "February (reported): a Copernicus Climate Change Service analysis indicated that from February 2023 through January 2024, global warming exceeded 1.5 °C for the first time.[3] This 365-day running average is distinct from the longer-duration 1.5 °C threshold agreed on in the 2015 Paris Agreement.[3]"

1. The first time recorded was Feb 2016, at +1.51 °C.
2. Feb2023-Jan2024 was a first for a 12 month average, not 365 days, see https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-2024-world-experienced-warmest-january-record and the BBC source
3. The Paris Agreement does not specify a "longer duration". Weird, but it does not specify any duration, see article 2.1.a on page 22, quote: "Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels..."
4. The "longer-duration 1.5 °C threshold" does not match the correct text in the BBC source: "This first year-long breach doesn't break that landmark Paris agreement, but it does bring the world closer to doing so in the long-term."

Uwappa (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

@Uwappa: I've amended the text to avoid some issues. Of course you're free to amend that paragraph, keeping in mind that all entries in this series of articles should be extremely short and concise. Note BBC article's chart recites "Average global air temperature compared with pre-industrial levels, running average of 365 days". —RCraig09 (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome.

Yes the BBC chart says 365 days, I am not sure it really is 365 days based and how that would work with leap years. The texts are about a 12 month average, see:

• Copernicus: "... for the past twelve months (Feb 2023 – Jan 2024) ... 1.52°C ..."
• Copernicus again, the highlighted Samantha Burgess quote "... just experienced a 12-month period of more than 1.5°C ..."
• Copernicus again, https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-january-2024 "The global mean temperature for the past twelve months (Feb 2023 – Jan 2024) ... 1.52°C above the 1850-1900 pre-industrial average. "
• BBC: The period from February 2023 to January 2024 reached 1.52C of warming, ...

Uwappa (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick fixes. A smaller text issue: "This running average is distinct from the 1.5 °C threshold agreed on in the 2015 Paris Agreement."

Eh true, a running average is not the same as a 1.5 C threshold, but that is probably not what you mean. Uwappa (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I see your point, and have changed the language accordingly. More importantly, I have also changed the language in accordance with BBC's description, "At the current rate of emissions, the Paris goal of limiting warming to 1.5C as a long-term average - rather than a single year - could be crossed within the next decade." (emphasis added). This should be the final fix. —RCraig09 (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I've seen your new text: "This single-year breach does not violate the 1.5 °C long-term average agreed on in the 2015 Paris Agreement."

Really? Which article of the Paris Agreement defines that long term average? What is that definition?

Sorry to bring old but bad news, but the Paris agreement does not define a long-term average. I wish it did. See link to article 2.1.a above.

The BBC text does not mention the Paris agreement, but "the Paris goal". Uwappa (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

First, the BBC reference does indeed refer to the Paris agreement: "This first year-long breach doesn't break that landmark Paris agreement". Second, the difference between a short-term breach and a long-term average is clearly described even if the details of the long-term average (Personal attack removed). With a reliable source (BBC), we don't have to do original research to critique and flyspeck ambiguities in an agreement that's almost nine years old. I don't see any reason to continue this discussion. —RCraig09 (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPA and take back your words. Uwappa (talk) 22:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

It was not a personal attack. I don't see a reason to continue this discussion. —RCraig09 (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I maintain: there is no 1.5 °C long-term average agreed on in the 2015 Paris Agreement.

1. Your text mentions "the 1.5 °C long-term average agreed on in the 2015 Paris Agreement". The BBC text does not mention a "long term average". Your text misquotes the BBC.
2. Please read https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/whats-number-meaning-15-c-climate-threshold for this quote: "It's also important to note that the Paris Agreement does not specify how many years should make up this long-term trend, which dataset should be used, and which time period makes up the pre-industrial period. That means different scientists, governments and groups might come to different conclusions about when Earth passes this critical threshold."
3. The Paris Agreement does not even mention the concept of a long term average. Article 4 does mention long-term goal, while referring to article 2, but does not define a long-term average.
4. Different scientists do reach different conclusions, see recent article in the Guardian: Ancient sea sponges at centre of controversial claim world has already warmed by 1.7C

I hope you share the conclusion that your text does need further fine-tuning. Uwappa (talk) 08:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

As I previously quoted 21:46, 13 February, the BBC reference states "At the current rate of emissions, the Paris goal of limiting warming to 1.5C as a long-term average - rather than a single year - could be crossed within the next decade". It would be more efficient if you were to fine-tune the language yourself. —RCraig09 (talk) 16:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

State of the Global Climate 2023

That is published in 2024, but about 2023. Move it to 2023_in_climate_change? Uwappa (talk) 20:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done —RCraig09 (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

2024 record high so far

Describe in intro that jan, feb, mar, apr, may and jun all were record high? See

• https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/monthly-report/global/202405/supplemental/page-1
• https://climate.copernicus.eu/may-2024-marks-12-months-record-breaking-global-temperatures

Uwappa (talk) 08:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm aware that the last ~12 months have been record highs for those particular months. We should wait until the streak is broken before adding an entry, rather than posting a new entry, repeatedly, each month. That approach "future-proofs" the article. WP:NOTNEWS is somewhat relevant also. —RCraig09 (talk) 16:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)