2) "The report relies on an unrealistically pessimistic 4.5°C warming scenario." The report does not use the RCP8.5 scenario. The temperature projections in our “growth-focused macroeconomic scenarios” are based on our own modelling framework and are not supposed to be "business-as-usual" or "current policy" pathways. Rather, they are designed to illustrate the consequences of a future narrative that prioritizes rapid aggregate growth while failing to accelerate the energy transition or adopt other emissions-reducing policies. Specifically, these scenarios assume continued large-scale economic growth (economy size in 2100 is 8 times today's world economy), an unchanged global sectoral consumption, and energy developments broadly consistent with current-policy trajectories from the International Energy Agency (extended to 2100). This results in very large emission numbers and temperature rise projections. We don’t advocate for these scenarios but simply use them to decompose the emission reduction drivers: sufficiency (reduced labour hours, sectoral change, reforestation) is as important as the energy transition (end to fossil fuels, electrification, improvements in energy efficiency) to stay within 2 degrees.

the worst part of getting fired was the hr lady butchering the delivery while reading my tweets

Today we're announcing America's Workforce Academy (AWA), the largest private-sector commitment to the skilled trades in American history, beginning with a $115 million commitment in the first year alone. This cost-free program supports all participants while they learn and then guarantees a job for all graduates in high-demand fields such as electrical work, mechanical systems and plumbing. Every graduate will be guaranteed a job on a Meta construction site. Learn more: meta.com/AmericasWorkforceAc…

Something that will make you an elite level email communicator: Answering all questions/responding to all items brought up in an email, rather than picking and choosing and making people continue to track you down.