{"id":279271,"date":"2023-09-18T11:14:24","date_gmt":"2023-09-18T09:14:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=279271"},"modified":"2023-09-18T11:14:36","modified_gmt":"2023-09-18T09:14:36","slug":"dont-buy-planetary-boundaries-hype","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=279271","title":{"rendered":"Don\u2019t Buy \u201cPlanetary Boundaries\u201d Hype"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

From Science Matters<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Latest diagram from Stockholm Resilience Centre<\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The usual suspects are beating on their \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d drum to scare up submission to Zero Carbon restrictions.  Remember these are the same climate justice warriors pushing the notion of a new geological era named \u201cAnthropocene\u201d.  For example, cue the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Six of nine planetary boundaries now exceeded\u2013Phys.org<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Humans Have Crossed 6 of 9 \u2018Planetary Boundaries\u2019\u2013Scientific American<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earth is now outside most of the \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d under which human civilization emerged\u2013TechSpot<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Six out of 9 planetary boundaries breached, Earth increasingly becoming uninhabitable for humans\u2013MSN.com<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Humanity deep in the danger zone of planetary boundaries: study\u2013YAHOO!News<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Etc., Etc. Etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Background<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

In 2009<\/strong>, a group of 29 scholars published an article in Nature<\/strong>, advancing an approach to define a \u201csafe operating space for humanity\u201d (1). The group argued that we can identify a set of nine \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d that humanity must not cross<\/strong> at the cost of its own peril. Since this 2009 publication, the concept of planetary boundaries has been highly influential in generating academic debate and in shaping research projects and policy recommendations worldwide<\/strong>. At the same time, the concept has come under heavy scrutiny as well, and many critics<\/strong> have taken the floor contesting the broader framework as well as its implementation and interpretation. Partially because of this critique, the original proposition of nine planetary boundaries has undergone various reformulations and updates by their proponents and an emerging network of scholars specializing in planetary boundary research.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The original 2009 paper in Nature suggested nine boundary conditions in the earth system that could, if crossed, result in a major disruption in (parts of) the system and a transition to a different state, which is likely to be hostile to human prosperity. The proposed planetary boundaries<\/strong> included:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2666  climate change,<\/em>
\u2666  biodiversity loss,<\/em>
\u2666  the nitrogen cycle,<\/em>
\u2666  the phosphorus cycle,<\/em>
\u2666  stratospheric ozone depletion,<\/em>
\u2666  ocean acidification,<\/em>
\u2666  global freshwater use,<\/em>
\u2666  <\/strong>land use change,<\/em>
\u2666  atmospheric aerosol loading, and<\/em>
\u2666  chemical pollution.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For each of these planetary boundaries, one or more control variables were identified<\/strong> (e.g., atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration), which in turn were assigned with numerical boundary values<\/strong> at a \u201csafe\u201d distance from dangerous levels, or where applicable, \u201ctipping points\u201d in earth system processes<\/strong> (1).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eventually, the framework should allow for quantification of threshold parameters,<\/strong> as a guide also for political responses<\/strong>. For some planetary boundaries, the group in 2009 suggested that the current state of knowledge was too uncertain to allow for quantification. Yet, for other earth system processes, the group felt confident enough to suggest a specific boundary value.<\/strong> In this endeavor, they erred on the side of caution and a strict interpretation of the precautionary principle: Where they saw remaining uncertainties, the group suggested the lower values for the boundary that they identified.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They concluded that three planetary boundaries had been crossed already.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On climate change<\/strong>, for instance, the boundary value<\/strong> proposed was 350 ppm,<\/strong> which had been passed long ago in the second half of the twentieth century. Regarding biodiversity,<\/strong> the current extinction rate<\/strong> is more than 100 extinct species per million species per year,<\/strong> whereas the suggested boundary was 10<\/strong> extinctions. As for the nitrogen cycle<\/strong>, humans remove today approximately 121 million tons of nitrogen per year from the atmosphere, whereas a safe rate would be a maximum of 35 million tons.<\/strong> In these three areas, therefore, this analysis suggested that humankind had pushed the earth system past planetary boundaries and possibly dangerous levels, into a new\u2014and unknown\u2014world.  Source: The Boundaries of the Planetary Boundary Framework: A Critical Appraisal of Approaches to Define a \u201cSafe Operating Space\u201d for Humanity.<\/strong><\/a>  Annual Review of Environment and Resources October 2020<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We don\u2019t know how long we can keep transgressing these key boundaries before combined pressures lead to irreversible change and harm.\u2013Johan Rockstr\u00f6m, co-author and Centre researcher<\/mark><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Critics of the Planetary Boundaries Framework<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Leaving aside those who want the boundaries to be tighter and harder than presented, let\u2019s hear from critics challenging the whole enterprise. Shortly after the invention of \u201cplanetary boundaries,\u201d Breakthrough Institute published a thorough critique of the notion and the framework.  Planetary Boundaries: A Review of the Evidence.<\/strong><\/a>  Linus Blomqvist (2012)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The planetary boundaries hypothesis<\/strong> \u2013 embraced by United Nations bodies and leading nongovernmental organizations like Oxfam and WWF \u2013 has serious scientific flaws and is a misleading guide<\/strong> to global environmental management, according to a new report by the Breakthrough Institute. The hypothesis, which will be debated this month at the UN Earth Summit in Brazil, posits that there are nine global biophysical limits to human development.<\/strong> But after an extensive literature review and informal peer review by leading experts, the Breakthrough Institute has found the concept of \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d to be a poor basis for policy and for understanding local and global environmental challenges.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

KEY FINDINGS<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

\u2666   Six of the \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d \u2014 land-use change, biodiversity loss, nitrogen levels, freshwater use, aerosol loading, and chemical pollution \u2014 do not have planetary biophysical boundaries in themselves.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2666   Aside from their impacts on the global climate, these non-threshold \u201cboundaries\u201d operate on local and regional, not global, levels.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2666   There is little evidence to support the claim that transgressing any of the six non-threshold boundaries would have a net negative effect on human material welfare.  The full report is linked below:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new report from the Breakthrough Institute highlights scientific flaws
of the \u201cplanetary boundaries\u201d hypothesis<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Planetary Boundaries as Power Grab\u2013Giving Political Decisions a Scientific Sheen\u2013<\/a><\/strong>Roger Pielke Jr. (2013)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the cover of the Economist famously announced \u2018Welcome to the anthropocene\u2019<\/strong><\/a> <\/strong>a couple of years ago, was it welcoming us to a new geological epoch, or a dangerous new world of undisputed scientific authority and anti-democratic politics?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The basis for the power grab by the experts \u2013 really old wine in new bottles<\/a> <\/strong>\u2013 is the fashionable idea of \u201cplanetary boundaries<\/a>\u201c<\/strong> which holds that there are hard and fast ecological limits<\/strong> within which human activity must be constrained. The concept is much contested scientifically<\/strong> \u2014 such as in this excellent review<\/a> by my colleagues at The Breakthrough Institute.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A real-world example<\/strong> of the implications of the planetary boundaries political philosophy is vividly seen through the issue of global energy access.<\/strong> Future global development, at least in the short term, necessarily will involve trade offs<\/strong> between expanded use of carbon-emitting fossil fuels and the expansion of energy access to the world\u2019s poorest<\/a>. The planetary boundaries advocates<\/strong>, consist with their hierarchical values framework, call for \u201cuniversal clean energy\u201d<\/strong> and recommend development targets focused not<\/strong> on measuring expanded energy access,<\/strong> but rather carbon dioxide emissions (here in PDF<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In other words, expanded energy access to the world\u2019s poorest is deemed acceptable
only if it first satisfies the demands of planetary boundaries \u2013 in other words,
the political demands of the scientists couched in the inviolable authority of science.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

An major recent critique was: Planetary Boundaries <\/strong>for Biodiversity:  Implausible Science, Pernicious Policies<\/strong><\/a>  by Montoya, Donohue and Pimm. Trends in Ecology and Evolution (2018)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The notion of a \u2018safe operating space for biodiversity\u2019 is vague and encourages harmful policies.<\/strong> Attempts to fix it strip it of all meaningful content. Ecology is rapidly gaining insights into the connections between biodiversity and ecosystem stability.<\/strong> We have no option but to understand ecological complexity and act accordingly.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

How best should environmental science articulate its concerns, set research agendas, and advise policies?One solution embraces the notion of planetary boundaries<\/strong> [1] arguing that global environmental processes very generally have \u2018tipping points\u2019.<\/strong> These are catastrophes involving thresholds<\/strong> beyond which there will be rapid transitions to new states<\/strong> that are very much less favorable to human existence<\/strong> than current states. The associated notion is that humanity\u2019s \u2018business as usual\u2019 can only continue so long as it remains within some \u2018safe operating space\u2019.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We show that notions of planetary boundaries add no insight into our understanding
of the threats to biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, have no evidence to support them,
are too vague for use by those who manage biodiversity, and promote pernicious policies.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fatally, the boundaries framework lacks clear definitions,<\/strong> or it has too many conflicting definitions, does not specify units, and fails to define terms operationally, thus prohibiting application by those who set policy or manage natural resources. Moreover, recent reviews indicate that tipping points occur only rarely in<\/strong><\/em>
natural systems<\/strong> [6], while policies related to boundaries are unlikely to be evidence based<\/strong>. A need for operational definitions to aid managers is self-evident [7].<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the heart of the problem are terms<\/strong> such as \u2018planetary boundaries\u2019, but also \u2018sustainability\u2019, \u2018health\u2019, \u2018harmony\u2019, and others, that are emotionally appealing but rarely, if ever, defined.<\/strong> They all speak to the urgent need to understand how human impacts change ecosystems, when at best we aspire to protect only<\/em>
half of it. We must set policies and establish management for the vast tracts of land and sea<\/strong> that we do not protect. Fatally, those who do so often use language that does not borrow from the existing knowledge about ecosystem processes<\/strong>, nor readily translates its aspirations to those who study them [7].<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

See Also:<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Planetary Boundaries as Millenarian Prophesies<\/strong><\/a>  Malthusian Echoes<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The identification of the planetary boundaries<\/strong> is dependent on the normative assumptions<\/strong> made, for example, concerning the value of biodiversity and the desirability of the Holocene. Rather than non-negotiables, humanity faces a system of trade-offs \u2013 not only economic, but moral and aesthetic as well.<\/strong> Deciding how to balance these trade-offs is a matter of political contestation (Blomqvist et al, 2012:37). What counts as \u201cunacceptable environmental change\u201d is not a matter of scientific fact,<\/strong> but involves judgments concerning the value of the things to be affected by the potential changes. The framing of planetary boundaries as being scientifically derived non-negotiable limits, obscures the inherent normativity of deciding how to react to environmental change. Presenting human values as facts of nature is an effective political strategy to shut down debate.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Beyond Planetary Boundaries<\/strong><\/a> by Michael Shellenberger, Ted Nordhaus, and Linus Blomqvist (2012)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are useful implications for environmental change science that can be drawn from where planetary boundaries went wrong<\/strong>. First, any pragmatic framework<\/strong> on environmental change must look at benefits and costs<\/strong>. Some of the hypothesis\u2019s authors have said that their motivation was to provide a useful framework for helping global leaders manage environmental change. We applaud and support this motivation. But for any environmental change framework to be useful, it must seek to understand not only the costs of change but also its benefits.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the implications of this is that simply measuring variance from Holocene baselines is a highly misleading metric of human sustainability<\/strong>. Since so much variance from the Holocene has been good for humans, future environmental change cannot be assumed, as planetary boundaries does, to be negative for our welfare.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We don\u2019t know how long we can keep transgressing these key boundaries before combined pressures lead to irreversible change and harm.\u2013Johan Rockstr\u00f6m, co-author and Centre researcher<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":279278,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691821010,691822700,691818056,691818076,691822699],"class_list":["post-279271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-biodiversity-loss","tag-chemical-pollution","tag-climate-change","tag-co2","tag-the-nitrogen-cycle","fallback-thumbnail"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/0Planetary-Boundaries-2022.webp?fit=1920%2C1800&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1aEn","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":407959,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=407959","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":0},"title":"The Doughnut Delusion: A Case Study in How to Turn Data into Ideology","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/13\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"It\u2019s fitting that a pair of academics from Oxford and Leeds have decided the best way to save humanity is to bake a giant metaphorical pastry. The Doughnut of Social and Planetary Boundaries, recently published in Nature (October 2025), offers us what its authors, Andrew Fanning and Kate Raworth, describe\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cCritical planetary degradation\u201d\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cCritical planetary degradation\u201d","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=critical-planetary-degradation"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/041586_2025_9385_Fig1_HTML.webp?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/041586_2025_9385_Fig1_HTML.webp?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/041586_2025_9385_Fig1_HTML.webp?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/041586_2025_9385_Fig1_HTML.webp?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/041586_2025_9385_Fig1_HTML.webp?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":382772,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=382772","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":1},"title":"The Hill Pushes Discredited Ocean Acidity Scares","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"06\/11\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Coral cover is breaking records, real world data proves ocean life loves CO2, but none of this impedes a never-ending drip feed of ocean acidification scares.","rel":"","context":"In \"Aragonite\"","block_context":{"text":"Aragonite","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=aragonite"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/0DSC00306-corals-1024x684.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/0DSC00306-corals-1024x684.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/0DSC00306-corals-1024x684.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/0DSC00306-corals-1024x684.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":428942,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=428942","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":2},"title":"Is the Ocean Surface a boundary condition?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"03\/01\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"My previous post was a discussion about an important paper by Elizabeth Wong and Peter Minnett. The paper discusses the interaction between the thermal (or electromagnetic) skin layer (TSL) on the ocean and the bulk ocean. The TSL is only about 10 microns thick on average, although the thickness and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"boundary conditions\"","block_context":{"text":"boundary conditions","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=boundary-conditions"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/0-Is-the-Ocean-Surface-a-boundary-condition1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/0-Is-the-Ocean-Surface-a-boundary-condition1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/0-Is-the-Ocean-Surface-a-boundary-condition1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/0-Is-the-Ocean-Surface-a-boundary-condition1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":408086,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=408086","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":3},"title":"One Daily Beef Chipolata and a Small Nibble of Cheese: Eco Nutters Reveal New Planetary Health Diet","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/14\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Ignorance of basic human biology and the woke propagandising of food \u2018science\u2019 to control global human behaviour lies behind the recently-published second version of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet (PHD). Produced by dozens of credentialled cretins around the world, it restricts meat and dairy consumption to levels not seen since\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"C40 Cities\"","block_context":{"text":"C40 Cities","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=c40-cities"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQMt3O25C46lhUovgNRE0zg249EGCbbAIZXEIYBumndgMkR6i5EewKjlbvD-cdzrzfm1mZIsy1AH9_WZYJG6j8SbTZ8rnuz9RLhFU7dMPwkwmY8aThyYNKv23NTLkHVv.jpeg?fit=1200%2C719&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQMt3O25C46lhUovgNRE0zg249EGCbbAIZXEIYBumndgMkR6i5EewKjlbvD-cdzrzfm1mZIsy1AH9_WZYJG6j8SbTZ8rnuz9RLhFU7dMPwkwmY8aThyYNKv23NTLkHVv.jpeg?fit=1200%2C719&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQMt3O25C46lhUovgNRE0zg249EGCbbAIZXEIYBumndgMkR6i5EewKjlbvD-cdzrzfm1mZIsy1AH9_WZYJG6j8SbTZ8rnuz9RLhFU7dMPwkwmY8aThyYNKv23NTLkHVv.jpeg?fit=1200%2C719&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQMt3O25C46lhUovgNRE0zg249EGCbbAIZXEIYBumndgMkR6i5EewKjlbvD-cdzrzfm1mZIsy1AH9_WZYJG6j8SbTZ8rnuz9RLhFU7dMPwkwmY8aThyYNKv23NTLkHVv.jpeg?fit=1200%2C719&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQMt3O25C46lhUovgNRE0zg249EGCbbAIZXEIYBumndgMkR6i5EewKjlbvD-cdzrzfm1mZIsy1AH9_WZYJG6j8SbTZ8rnuz9RLhFU7dMPwkwmY8aThyYNKv23NTLkHVv.jpeg?fit=1200%2C719&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":284023,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=284023","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":4},"title":"Sadiq Khan Signs Up Londoners for the \u2018Planetary Health Diet\u2019 by 2030 With Meat Cut to WW2 Levels of 44g a Day","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/19\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Around 1939, when World War II began, the United Kingdom imported two-thirds of its food, all of which had to be shipped over oceans teeming with German U-boats. Every citizen was issued with a booklet, which he took to a registered shopkeeper to receive supplies. At first, only bacon, butter,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"C40 Cities\"","block_context":{"text":"C40 Cities","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=c40-cities"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/0Planetary_Diet.jpg?fit=1200%2C500&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/0Planetary_Diet.jpg?fit=1200%2C500&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/0Planetary_Diet.jpg?fit=1200%2C500&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/0Planetary_Diet.jpg?fit=1200%2C500&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/0Planetary_Diet.jpg?fit=1200%2C500&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":444632,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=444632","url_meta":{"origin":279271,"position":5},"title":"Competing Feedbacks from Meltwater Reshape Antarctic Ice-Shelf Melting","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/16\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Antarctic ice-shelf melt is a major source of uncertainty in future sea-level rise projections. Current climate models often fail to capture the interplay between melt and ocean circulation.","rel":"","context":"In \"Antarctic Ice Shelves\"","block_context":{"text":"Antarctic Ice Shelves","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=antarctic-ice-shelves"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Competing-Feedbacks-from-Meltwater-Reshape-Antarctic-Ice-Shelf-Melting.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Competing-Feedbacks-from-Meltwater-Reshape-Antarctic-Ice-Shelf-Melting.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Competing-Feedbacks-from-Meltwater-Reshape-Antarctic-Ice-Shelf-Melting.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Competing-Feedbacks-from-Meltwater-Reshape-Antarctic-Ice-Shelf-Melting.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Competing-Feedbacks-from-Meltwater-Reshape-Antarctic-Ice-Shelf-Melting.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=279271"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279271\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":279280,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279271\/revisions\/279280"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/279278"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=279271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=279271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=279271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}