Future of the Atmosphere W/Unregulated Pollution?

[parkinglot]

In a future (100, 500, and 1000 years in the future specifically) where industrial and domestic pollution is totally unregulated, what does the composition of the atmosphere look like? And what do weather systems look like? I know this is an extremely broad question, I'm just looking for a few thoughts from folks smarter than I am. I'm wondering what kind of protection humans would need in this future. Is the main issue still CO2 and global warming? What about particulate pollutants? At what point does it become unsafe to fly because of density of smog? Based on my limited knowledge I don't think even an extreme greenhouse gas effect future would be quite like Venus because of our more limited volcanic activity. So what does it look like? I recently read that Aerosols were actually holding off some of the effects of global warming by reflecting some of the suns energy and now that we have reduced them we're feeling a more extreme increase in temperature and that got me thinking about these questions. What does unregulated, polluted future look like? And specifically, what pollutants would more likely be in the atmosphere in larger quantities?
Thanks!

 

[jim mcnamara]

CO₂ is, per most climate scientists, possibly likely to be a shorter term problem than anything else you named. But yes, completely unchecked, those other pollutants are a problem as well. (Vague answer to a kind of vague question).

Here is a popular science version of research that indicates a POSSIBILITY of severe effects from CO₂ emissions:
https://theconversation.com/hothous...-here-before-heres-what-it-looked-like-101413

Here is the scientific article:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/07/31/1810141115

We cannot know the future long term for sure, but we can at least model climate by comparing it with past climates for which we have some data. That is what the study does. It takes us down a series of past events, which happened a long time ago, generally over much longer periods of time than the time elapsed since humans started smelting iron. It compares them to "now", insofar as that is possible to do.

PF does not support speculation, we simply deal with known studies. The authors of the study cited above say their conclusions are in no way inevitable, just possible. So let's not speculate about any of this, which would be the only way to give you detailed answers. I cited the study to let you see one problem. And its limits of understanding and prediction.