There's two reasons why temperature increases can't be stopped (without actually sending the heat away somewhere, such as into space): the first one is lag in the system if we cut emissions to zero, and the second is natural change in maybe 300 million years. Why bother mentioning the second of those?

▲

anonym29 4 hours ago | parent [-]

This is a strawman. The natural change happens orders of magnitude faster than 300 million years.

Also, is there a way to move heat into space that doesn't require adding more heat into the atmosphere than is removed from the expulsion? Or do you just mean this as a hypothetical example?

	▲	card_zero 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Well yeah, I just took the time interlude since the carboniferous and projected it into the future. But what's the real answer to how soon it would naturally get troublesomely hot, when worked out properly, and why is it still not very soon at all? Heat into space: I was thinking of "PDRC": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_daytime_radiative_cool... > If only 1%–2% of the Earth’s surface were instead made to radiate at [~100 W/m2] rather than its current average value, the total heat fluxes into and away from the entire Earth would be balanced and warming would cease. Which is, you know, a nice fantasy and theoretically works. Like a solar shield, but terrestrial. Edit for those thinking that even 1% is an unfeasibly large area: yes. It's about 5 million km², which is about one-fifth of North America. Maybe scatter the panels around the ocean?