Even the VPN route often doesn't work...

Aerosols are included as an element of radiative forcing along with greenhouse gasses.

Beyond that, tipping points have strong potential to amplify human forcing effects. When that happens is very uncertain. But we can be sure more warming means more likely. global-tipping-points.org/lana-downloa...

Aerosols have had a net cooling effect. As these reduce their masking effect reduces and so temps go up. Methane has a strong warming effect. But these two are fast responses. CO2 stays in atmosphere for centuries and it's that that will largely determine warming. www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/w...

The rate of increase in radiative forcing stops at net zero - in the sense that we are no longer adding more CO2 to the atmosphere. So *very* approximately, temperature increase will stop. It may carry on for a while/decade, perhaps much longer if we are unlucky.

More generally, another example of how it is cumulative emissions, not the current rate of emissions that determines warming. e.g. we will experience maximum temperature anomaly when we reach net zero (that's hopefully a when not an if).

No, it's still wrong. The rate of *temperature* increase has not decreased, in fact it has gone up. The rate of warming of past decade is about twice that between 80s and 2010. As for the argument that we have made progress with regards postulated end-of-century warming, I'm just too tired...

found it.
cicero.oslo.no/en/articles/...

The trajectory is essentially a vertical line. Glen has that excellent gif that animates how mitigation delay produces deeper net negative emissions.

Within a few years the budget for a 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C will be gone. We are in overshoot. Any hope for well below 2°C now relies on very significant carbon removal. When the policy penny drops that's not arriving there will then be scrabble for solar geoengineering.

Sticking it to the patriarchy one missed milestone at a time!