Heat stroke is a life-threatening medical emergency (e.g. call 911) when they body has gotten so hot that organ systems that are capable of regulating temperature start malfunctioning, and things can go downhill extremely quickly from that point.
I think the disconnect between many people hearing "2C of warming" and the overall effects that will have is grossly underestimated. I kinda wish we could talk about how much raw energy that is ... even if we use American units of barrels of oil, or something.
The real conversation we should have is about money talking; a huge amount of assets are facing being stranded by insurers. Insurance doesn't really care about ideology, they care about making money, and so the fact they are losing money to climate change is pretty irrefutable evidence. Though right now politicians are just reframing this as "greedy insurance", which isn't exactly untrue.
Insurance prices risk. If risk goes up, so do prices. They will not lose (much) money (or not for long) [1], your insurance will just get a lot more expensive, maybe to the point you can no longer afford it. If the government tries to control prices, then insurers will just exit the market, or the only entrants will be severely under-capitalized, merely providing the veneer of insurance (e.g., because your mortgage lender requires it). This is already happening in Florida and Louisiana [2]. These insurers will simply go bankrupt in the event of a catastrophe, and you will be stuck with the loss.
[1] Technically, in a competitive environment, many insurance companies will operate with a (small) underwriting loss, but they make up the difference by investing the float during the time between when they collect the premiums and when they pay out on claims. They will not operate with an unbounded loss.
[2] https://www.wsj.com/finance/small-insurance-company-hurrican...
"Climate denialism: A personal guarantee to host the displaced."
"Denying the crisis? Congratulations, you've just RSVP'd to house the refugees."
So… I don’t know where that leaves us. The moment you’re aware of what’s coming to us, you shut down. It’s not a great response, but that’s a big reason why we (the people) are not talking a lot about the future of climate.
That’s my best guess. It’s a really, really shitty conversation where the few winners are those with lots of money.
The problem is that the loudest voices in the global discussion are people living in relatively cold-ish Western climates because, well, we are the rich and powerful people. And for many of us (maybe bar the Southern-most part of the US), even 10 °C increase of yearly average temperatures or even peak temperatures would still be perfectly fine.
The fact that 2 °C is probably enough to render the space of potentially billions of people uninhabitable is completely outside of the experienced reality in Western countries, we cannot relate from our lived reality to theirs.
And that kind of disconnect is prevalent among any kind of discourse in humanity. The fact that we can even do so, that right here on this website we have people worth billions of dollars (e.g. sama is Sam Altman!) debating with people that barely scrape by on their national poverty level, is a wonder that would have been unimaginable 200 years ago. Human biology, human society hasn't evolved mechanisms to keep up with our technological progress, and it breaks apart everywhere.
Do you drive to Norway for your beach holiday?
Surely they'll reconsider once potentially billions of climate refugees flood countries up north.
Also I think the impact of weather extremes is underestimated. You can reinforce buildings against stronger winds. You can move people into climate-controlled buildings. Desalinate seawater when the rains stop.
But that's impossible for the bulk of agriculture. Now imagine extreme winds, droughts and/or wildfires decimate 1 or more staple crops - worldwide, in a single season. Economic chaos, wars & famine will ensue.
Compound effects are a thing. And there's an ever-growing list of candidates.
>3°C global warming is nuclear-WW3 level.
Actually look at median temperatures in the US. Summers in Atlanta and Chicago are remarkably similar as it is.
It's wild to think that we might be only 10 years away from that line in the sand we marked. Hopefully they are wrong but I fear they are not.
I think we've been enjoying a period of slow change as the oceans have been absorbing the extra heat energy over the last few decades, but we're now reaching the point where we're exhausting that heat sink and we're about to see dramatic climate change.
You’ll be allright
Findings from 2025 -
> Over the 12-month period, 4 billion people — about 49% of the global population — experienced at least 30 days of extreme heat (hotter than 90% of temperatures observed in their local area over the 1991-2020 period). [1]
[1] https://www.climatecentral.org/report/climate-change-and-the...
Edit: In the methodology section it is not clear whether they used one average or average for the date.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/pdf/10.1289/EHP9835
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01872-6
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266660652...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people...
And, of course, it’s even cuter because we ignore the part where most pollution is caused by corporations refusing to adopt more sustainable ways to do business, which would be ‘too expensive’.
We have enough models showing how we could very well survive a climate catastrophe, largely with cleaner energy, better business approaches, and the rich nations eating less meat; among many other things, of course.
Drawdown goes into a lot of detail. Some of the measures are even economically positive, if not politically so.
Putting India in a spot where if it would cease relying on coal power in 30-40+ years it would cause the temperature to rise.
Even in rural towns, the midday sun in India feels “dimmer” on a clear day. Even for the winter, this seems odd as the relatively lower latitude should make for more direct sun.
It feels like the soft warm filters used in photography… Outdoor sun normally bothers me greatly, but there sunglasses don’t even seem needed…
Not sure what proportion is coal dust, dirt, or wood smoke but something major is definitely going on…
The good thing about green energy is that one there is a sufficient amount of it, it can also be used for extensive indoor air conditioning.
The heat doesn't vanish with AC, at least not unless you use a very expensive deep-underground well as a heatsink instead of the open air.
Even if everyone has AC indoor - the air outdoor will still be too hot and, most likely, humid, with all the expelled heat from the ACs added on top of that. Animals won't stand a chance, especially wild ones, and humans that absolutely have to work outside (e.g. policemen, firefighters, EMS) will be just as impacted.
We have to face the reality: large parts of the globe, impacting billions of people, will be unable to support human and a lot of animal and plant life during the summer months if climate change continues at the current pace in a short enough time that most people reading this text will eventually witness this.
For the people that have to work outside: air conditioning in the vehicle, frequent breaks in air conditioned areas, and I wonder if we could get proper air conditioned clothing at some point (currently vests with fans embedded are quite frequent in Japan, but that's the best there is as of today).
But I agree with the last paragraph. Air conditioning is the only countermeasure we have but in the end the fact remains that many cities will eventually become incompatible with human life in summer.
Reflective clothing using PDRC materials will be a lot more feasible than personal air conditioning. The latter would require a powered spacesuit anyway which makes it awkward to work. See https://youtu.be/NVAcSgLZues although it's not about clothing, but the idea is the same.
Doesn't change the fact that when the wet-bulb temperature (i.e. a combination of the air temperature and humidity) does not allow for evaporative cooling (aka sweating) to work any more. No matter what, you cannot survive such conditions for a prolonged amount of time, as your body will slowly cook itself.
You can survive heat on its own in dry air (that's how people have thrived across MENA deserts, or how people survive saunas), you can survive extensive moisture (that's how people and plants have thrived in the rainforests). But you physically cannot survive in a wet-bulb temperature of > 35 °C for prolonged times.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_daytime_radiative_cool...
It ought to be great. Takes no energy, sends heat through the infrared window back out into space where it came from.
Purdue University produced a barium sulfate nanocomposite paint that has 98% reflectance in the desired band using a 150μm layer, cooling surfaces by 4.5C.
You can't force people to downgrade their lifestyle when they see that only applies to them and not to other people on the planet, making their suffering in vain.
Strong words coming from someone who's Austrian.
> to justify why their people should keep suffering hot summers living without AC while the other parts of the world and Europe do it just fine.
That was not my point. My point is, ACs aren't a panacea. We cannot let the planet heat up indefinitely because AC has fundamental limits.
The difference between sun and shade is pretty big too.
Standing outside talking to friends after the sun set, where it's still over 100F outside: I could feel brief (minor) chills pass over me as I'd sweat in bursts and it'd instantly evaporate.
And back when I was cycling, I'd start summer rides about an hour before dawn, when it'd be at its coldest (sometimes 90F for the low). I learned to not rub my face because I'd have salt crystals from dried sweat, and they would abrade skin near the corners of my eyes.
In USSR/Russia during especially hot summers the team/orgs i worked at (outside on construction and in the other years inside as programmers (no ACs were yet widespread there back in the 199x)) were working at night skipping the daytime siesta-style.
Yes, there are safety measure built in but I just give them a helping hand.