this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
156 points (94.8% liked)

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

5276 readers
618 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

what charts are using primary energy? the only useful metric is energy we can actually use, and all statistics I know generally compare emissions per kWh of electricity, not primary energy.

We don't take inti account the energy of the sun for calculating solar energy either.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The ones I've seen people using in online discourse are these which mislead the heck out of people trying to figure out how much work is needed for displacing fossil fuels.

[–] SolarMech@slrpnk.net 3 points 8 months ago

Oh wow, that is terrible and disapointing. Then again, when you think about it, it does mean the corrected graph gives us more hope.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 months ago

huh, interesting!

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 3 points 8 months ago

If we did then solar energy would be the most ridiculously inefficient energy source on Earth. Only 0.000000045% of the Sun's energy even hits Earth at all.

Though now that I think of it, uranium comes from supernovae and neutron star mergers. So nuclear power might be even less efficient.

[–] federalreverse@feddit.de 2 points 8 months ago

If you look around, there are tons of people who claim that all of the primary energy used today needs to be provided by renewables in the future (and that that's impossible).