this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
70 points (98.6% liked)

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

5393 readers
177 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
70
Who Were the Worst of the Worst Climate Polluters in the US in 2022? (insideclimatenews.org)
submitted 1 year ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] neanderthal@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm all for naming the culprits, but the leading picture is misleading and counterproductive. Sure, the steel plant is dirty, but it is better than a plant that is just as dirty or worse on the other side of the Pacific that is shipped here via dirty ship. To make matters worse, it wasn't even in the top 10 that the article later lists.

It sucks, but we have to be anal retentive about dotting our Is and crossing our Ts, or the opposition can dismiss sources like that as disingenuous and make it harder to win over fence sitters.

ETA: I live in the US and applied to the US because it was a US centric article.

[–] taiidan@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Very nice. Name and shame!

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How about a fine equal to all profit made by said companies, thier parents, and thier subsidiaries until emissions fall to within reasonable levels. I mean if carbon capture is going to offset everything like many of these plants claim, i’m sure they’d have no problem with it, right?

[–] taiidan@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

Haha, I wish!