- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Not that it matters much for my understanding, as these numbers are too big for my brain to grasp anyway, but what does that unit prefix “tn” stand for?
While reading the article in my head I read it as “tera tonne” but wouldn’t that be “Tt”?
I hope it’s at least a metric tonne and not one of the other weird short or long tonnes.
Trillion perhaps?
Looks like that’s the intention. The original paper uses Gt (gigatons): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36990-3
A horrifying thought
Thanks! That must be it.
I guess it means
freedomamerican tons.Then it would be saying 7.5tons tonnes which doesn’t make any sense.
SMH my head
Judging by similar articles, it’s “7.5 trillion tonnes.” I assume metric tonne because of the spelling (usually I’ve only seen short or long ton spelled ton, although it may vary by region).
deleted by creator
🔥 buckle up
deleted by creator
It’s more than 10 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
About a centimeter (spread out across the oceans).
“1/361.8 mm of sea-level rise per Gt of ice loss” is the assumption they use for that.
deleted by creator
Tera = 1000 gigas. Idk if they are doing a switch between metric and imperial tons as well but that difference is less than the margins of error anyways.
deleted by creator
( (1/361.8 mm of sea-level rise per Gt of ice loss) * 1000) * 7.5 = 20.73mm. Which is about double what the actual paper says, so there’s probably some weird metric vs imperial issues.
