Avoidable heat risk under scenarios of carbon neutrality by mid-century.

To prevent anthropogenic warming of the climate system above dangerous thresholds, governments are required by the Paris Agreement to peak global anthropogenic CO2 emissions and to reach a net zero CO2 emissions level (also known as carbon neutrality). Growing concerns are being expressed about the increasing heat stress caused by the interaction of changes in temperature and humidity in the context of global warming. Although much effort has been made to examine future changes in heat stress and associated risks, gaps remain in understanding the quantitative benefits of heat-risk avoidance from carbon-neutral policies, limited by the traditional climate projections from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Here we quantify the avoided heat risk during 2040-2049 under two scenarios of global carbon neutrality by 2060 and 2050, i.e., moderate green (MODGREEN) and strong green (STRGREEN) recovery scenarios, relative to the baseline scenario (FOSSIL), based on multi-model large ensemble climate projections from a new climate model intercomparison project (CovidMIP) that endorsed by CMIP6. We show that global population exposure to extreme heat stress increases by approximately four times its current level during 2040-2049 under the FOSSIL scenario, whereas the heat exposure could be reduced by as much as 12 % and 23 % under the MODGREEN and STRGREEN scenarios, respectively. Moreover, global mean heat-related mortality risk is mitigated by 14 % (24 %) under the MODGREEN (STRGREEN) scenario during 2040-2049 relative to the FOSSIL scenario. Additionally, the aggravating heat risk could be mitigated by around a tenth by achieving carbon neutrality 10 years earlier (2050 versus 2060). In terms of spatial pattern, this heat-risk avoidance from low-carbon policies is typically greater in low-income countries. Our findings assist governments in advancing early climate change mitigation policy-making.

From Mourning and Melancholia to Neurobiology in an Era of Global Warming, Pandemic Disease, and Social Chasms: Grief as a Requisite for Change.

We find ourselves in a unique time in history with the confluence of a pandemic, global warming, and social chasms felt throughout the world. In this article, it is suggested that the grieving process is necessary for progress. The article addresses grief from a psychodynamic lens and progresses through the neurobiological changes that occur in the grieving process. The article discusses grief as both a result of and a necessary response to COVID-19, global warming, and social unrest. It is argued that grief is a vital process in order to fully change as a society and move forward. The role of psychiatry, and specifically psychodynamic psychiatry, is integral in paving the way to this new understanding and a new future.

Mapping Building-Based Spatiotemporal Distributions of Carbon Dioxide Emission: A Case Study in England.

The spatiotemporal inventory of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the building sector is significant for formulating regional and global warming mitigation policies. Previous studies have attempted to use energy consumption models associated with field investigations to estimate CO2 emissions from buildings at local scales, or they used spatial proxies to downscale emission sources from large geographic units to grid cells for larger scales. However, mapping the spatiotemporal distributions of CO2 emissions on a large scale based on buildings remains challenging. Hence, we conducted a case study in England in 2015, wherein we developed linear regression models to analyze monthly CO2 emissions at the building scale by integrating the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research, building data, and Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite night-time lights images. The results showed that the proposed model that considered building data and night-time light imagery achieved the best fit. Fine-scale spatial heterogeneity was observed in the distributions of building-based CO2 emissions compared to grid-based emission maps. In addition, we observed seasonal differences in CO2 emissions. Specifically, buildings emitted significantly more CO2 in winter than in summer in England. We believe our results have great potential for use in carbon neutrality policy making and climate monitoring.

Large-scale decrease in the social salience of climate change during the COVID-19 pandemic.

There are concerns that climate change attention is waning as competing global threats intensify. To investigate this possibility, we analyzed all link shares and reshares on Meta's Facebook platform (e.g., shares and reshares of news articles) in the United States from August 2019 to December 2020 (containing billions of aggregated and de-identified shares and reshares). We then identified all link shares and reshares on "climate change" and "global warming" from this repository to develop a social media salience index-the Climate SMSI score-and found an 80% decrease in climate change content sharing and resharing as COVID-19 spread during the spring of 2020. Climate change salience then briefly rebounded in the autumn of 2020 during a period of record-setting wildfires and droughts in the United States before returning to low content sharing and resharing levels. This fluctuating pattern suggests new climate communication strategies-focused on "systemic sustainability"-are necessary in an age of competing global crises.

The global effectiveness of fact-checking: Evidence from simultaneous experiments in Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

The spread of misinformation is a global phenomenon, with implications for elections, state-sanctioned violence, and health outcomes. Yet, even though scholars have investigated the capacity of fact-checking to reduce belief in misinformation, little evidence exists on the global effectiveness of this approach. We describe fact-checking experiments conducted simultaneously in Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom, in which we studied whether fact-checking can durably reduce belief in misinformation. In total, we evaluated 22 fact-checks, including two that were tested in all four countries. Fact-checking reduced belief in misinformation, with most effects still apparent more than 2 wk later. A meta-analytic procedure indicates that fact-checks reduced belief in misinformation by at least 0.59 points on a 5-point scale. Exposure to misinformation, however, only increased false beliefs by less than 0.07 points on the same scale. Across continents, fact-checks reduce belief in misinformation, often durably so.