cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/4810640
Archived copies of the article: archive.today ghostarchive.org
Annotated text, via Richard Delevan
Really? None of the oil execs in charge of COP28 want reductions in fossil fuel usage? So weird.
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
119 points (96.9% liked)
World News
38970 readers
2425 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Considering we’re already past the point where we could have saved the planet even this is pathetic. Had we adopted this in the early 80s when we had a chance, yes. But then, Reagan.
I know you want it to be stated outright, which is unlikely to happen. However, section e does state pretty directly:
(e) Reducing both consumption and production of fossil fuels, in a just, orderly and equitable manner so as to achieve net zero by, before, or around 2050 in keeping with the science;
Yes, you can pick on 'the science' and what 'net zero' means, but unequivocally phasing out all fossil fuels in 27 years is not achievable unless we found ways to completely replace our current infrastructural needs by that time. This includes upscaling biodiesel and ethanol production to run existing machinery that cannot yet run on electric or hydrogen power, including planes, freighters, etc.
It is worth being wary of any pledges that list net zero as the end line.
Net zero is actually not good enough right now. It's almost certainly necessary to get to negative emissions for at least some period of time to undo damage. Which means it's not a goal of getting to carbon neutral, the goal is to eliminate as many carbon emissions as we can.
It's becoming increasingly apparent that net zero is a very achievable goal even on a fairly short timeline. That all of the promises so many conservatives have about the disastrous effects it would have on the economy to pursue it are complete nonsense, and so we need to just commit and go for it. So now a lot of the biggest deniers and evildoers, are trying to subtly push for net zero being the final goal post instead of just another mile marker. It is a sort of thought-ending cliche, and it's very clever.
net zero is a very achievable goal
Citation needed.
27 years is a long time. Full replacement or retrofit is doable in that kind of time.
Thats the whole point: it doesnt call for the reduction of fossil fuels. The idea behind the draft is that we continue to invest and consume fossil fuels until some magic technology saves us by capturing and storing the CO2.
These are pipe dreams, the same way that the 1.5 pledges were.
Why have I never heard of COP28 before this month
Ignorance
Lazy marketing of a climate conference that honestly seems to have no real legitimacy at the moment, so no real need to cover it unless paid to cover it?
There may not have been much to tell until it actually started, which was one day before the start of this month (modulo time zones, it was held in UTC+04).
It's an annual thing apparently (except during the height of the pandemic) and this was the 28th time, hence the "28" in the name. Presumably they'll hold COP29 next year, and now you've heard of that one about a year beforehand! 😛
Maybe you're allergic to bullshit and so have been avoiding it pathologically.
I concur!
COPIUM28