Mitchell Dickau
@mitchelldickau.bsky.social
Climate models. Temperature overshoot. Remaining carbon budgets. Effect of climate change on outdoor skating in Canada.
PhD candidate, Concordia University
PhD candidate, Concordia University
Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking carbon dioxide removal is the solution to climate change.
It’s a small piece of the puzzle. But it won't be able to offset a substantial portion of our fossil fuel emissions 🧵
It’s a small piece of the puzzle. But it won't be able to offset a substantial portion of our fossil fuel emissions 🧵
October 9, 2025 at 7:53 PM
Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking carbon dioxide removal is the solution to climate change.
It’s a small piece of the puzzle. But it won't be able to offset a substantial portion of our fossil fuel emissions 🧵
It’s a small piece of the puzzle. But it won't be able to offset a substantial portion of our fossil fuel emissions 🧵
April 30, 2025 at 7:39 AM
The land sink is uncertain in a changing climate. This is another reason why using nature-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to offset fossil emissions can be sketchy...
The EU forest sink is getting much weaker, with some major revisions based on updated data, particularly from Germany.
LULUCF in 2020 was -270MtCO2, but is now -220MtCO2 (approx the same in 2010). The EU has a target of -300MtCO2!
See details of the German revision:
bsky.app/profile/robb...
2/2
LULUCF in 2020 was -270MtCO2, but is now -220MtCO2 (approx the same in 2010). The EU has a target of -300MtCO2!
See details of the German revision:
bsky.app/profile/robb...
2/2
April 22, 2025 at 4:56 PM
The land sink is uncertain in a changing climate. This is another reason why using nature-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to offset fossil emissions can be sketchy...
We should point to the rising costs of insurance to demonstrate that climate change is dangerous and is worth mitigating against/ adapting to. I suspect that, for many folks, $$ is easier to understand than climate observations and projections.
Informative podcast on insurance and climate change
Informative podcast on insurance and climate change
How Wildfires Destroyed California’s Insurance Market
Podcast Episode · Shift Key with Robinson Meyer and Jesse Jenkins · 2025-01-22 · 1h 12m
podcasts.apple.com
January 23, 2025 at 1:09 AM
We should point to the rising costs of insurance to demonstrate that climate change is dangerous and is worth mitigating against/ adapting to. I suspect that, for many folks, $$ is easier to understand than climate observations and projections.
Informative podcast on insurance and climate change
Informative podcast on insurance and climate change
Great reads. I've always believed that changes in the insurance industry are a powerful tool for driving momentum for climate policy. Unlike many other industries, private insurance can't afford to ignore climate impacts or delay action (state-run insurance is a bit different)
Houston Chronicle knocked it out of the park with their series of articles about homeowners insurance in Texas. This is a looming catastrophe.
First article: Inside the costly new reality of insuring a home in Texas
www.houstonchronicle...
First article: Inside the costly new reality of insuring a home in Texas
www.houstonchronicle...
‘Never experienced anything like this:’ The new reality of insuring a Texas home
Texas homeowners are struggling to keep their homes insured, paying more for less coverage as climate change wreaks havoc on providers.
www.houstonchronicle.com
December 6, 2024 at 4:33 PM
Great reads. I've always believed that changes in the insurance industry are a powerful tool for driving momentum for climate policy. Unlike many other industries, private insurance can't afford to ignore climate impacts or delay action (state-run insurance is a bit different)
1/3 Another study showing why nature-based carbon removal, in which the duration of removal may only be years to decades at worst, should not be used to offset fossil emissions.
Our latest research estimates that almost 40 percent of California’s forest offset buffer pool has been lost to wildfire. That’s roughly twice as many credits than have been set aside to address wildfire risks for the next 100 years. (1/4) 🧪https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17599
December 2, 2024 at 7:38 PM
1/3 Another study showing why nature-based carbon removal, in which the duration of removal may only be years to decades at worst, should not be used to offset fossil emissions.
Susan Solomon's study, demonstrating that warming caused by CO₂ persists for thousands of years, and Damon Matthews' (my supervisor) study, showing that near-zero emissions are necessary to stabilize warming, were published 15 and 16 years ago, respectively. It seems the message still hasn't sunk in
The 2024 Global Carbon Budget projects fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of 37.4 billion tonnes, up 0.8% from 2023.
Despite the urgent need to cut emissions to slow climate change, there is still “no sign” that the world has reached a peak in fossil CO2 emissions.
Despite the urgent need to cut emissions to slow climate change, there is still “no sign” that the world has reached a peak in fossil CO2 emissions.
November 13, 2024 at 9:58 PM
Susan Solomon's study, demonstrating that warming caused by CO₂ persists for thousands of years, and Damon Matthews' (my supervisor) study, showing that near-zero emissions are necessary to stabilize warming, were published 15 and 16 years ago, respectively. It seems the message still hasn't sunk in
Happy to have played a small part in @sethwynes.bsky.social newest paper!
An interesting finding is that IPCC authors estimates' of peak warming and when we'll reach net-zero CO2 are inconsistent with climate modelling and scenario literature. We discuss some potential explanations
An interesting finding is that IPCC authors estimates' of peak warming and when we'll reach net-zero CO2 are inconsistent with climate modelling and scenario literature. We discuss some potential explanations
Check out our new open-access paper!
We surveyed 211 IPCC authors, finding most authors are doubtful that warming will be limited to the Paris targets of well below 2°C
www.nature.com/articles/s43...
We surveyed 211 IPCC authors, finding most authors are doubtful that warming will be limited to the Paris targets of well below 2°C
www.nature.com/articles/s43...
Perceptions of carbon dioxide emission reductions and future warming among climate experts - Communications Earth & Environment
The authors of the IPCC Assessment Report are skeptical that warming can be limited below 2 degrees Celsius according to the survey of 211 experts and statistical analysis.
www.nature.com
September 12, 2024 at 5:53 PM
Happy to have played a small part in @sethwynes.bsky.social newest paper!
An interesting finding is that IPCC authors estimates' of peak warming and when we'll reach net-zero CO2 are inconsistent with climate modelling and scenario literature. We discuss some potential explanations
An interesting finding is that IPCC authors estimates' of peak warming and when we'll reach net-zero CO2 are inconsistent with climate modelling and scenario literature. We discuss some potential explanations