this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
238 points (99.2% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5240 readers
497 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
238
‘Magical’ tech innovations a distraction from real solutions, climate experts warn | Overemphasis on innovation and carbon removal risks distracting from main goal of stopping use of fossil fuels, say (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 11 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I have an idea: what if we were to bomb the shit out of countries that are major polluters. We should go to war over the fate of this earth but instead we go to war over the need to execute millions of people so we can get at their oil.

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

We are the major polluters

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So?

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

There's nobody to bomb and go to war with, we literally just have to stop.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

As they say, the call was coming from inside the house

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Of course we are. However, China is even worse. Obviously I am being unrealistic but it's funny how the most important thing in the world (the world itsself) is less important to the world's societies than an artificial construct like money. You can't bring your belongings with you when you die.

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Per capita, we pollute twice as much as China does. On top of that, most of their pollution is directly linked to making products for us.

We are the bad guys here, no contest. Especially when looking at how our government fights the transition every step of the way.

I totally agree though, it's completely mental that the environment isn't our top priority.