this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023
91 points (85.8% liked)

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

5023 readers
395 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
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 44 points 9 months ago (1 children)

A lot of "we" talk. I don't run a lot of industries, so I don't think we're equal levels of culpable

[–] [email protected] 34 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I don’t remember spilling 50,000 tons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

You are right, but if it weren’t for the amount of consumers and our growing appetite for conveniences the world would look hell of a lot differently.

Now we’re at a point where meaningful climate action would be a sacrifice so big not many of us selfish little pieces of shit would take. No more plastic, no more meat, no more cars, no more global overnight shipping for items you don’t even need. We’ve grown very accustomed to things we only just recently realized are extremely expensive and we cant afford them. Too bad that the people who make those things are even less willing to stop selling them to us, than we are to buy. We really are screwed, because one day it’ll all abruptly stop. There will be no gradual progression into the climate extinction. We will be pretending we’re not at fault until our dying breaths.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

No, without the profiteers capitalizing on our desires the world would look a lot differently.

[–] WheeGeetheCat 18 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

'We' can't address climate change because the global elite are dependent on the profits from harming the environment to fill their money banks, and it turns out they have all the power.

I do not need to rewire my brain, I need to build power structure so that I can eat the rich w/ that donut

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Right? You could use this argument for why all delayed gratification is essentially impossible (but also something people regularly do), or why it's impossible to stop murder or other illegal activity. Some sort of police force would just be impossible in an ancap world after all...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Do you not believe that in a functioning democracy, such as some found in europe, you could simply vote to address climate change?

I live in Germany. People here could easily vote to "eat the rich" and to reduce emissions. But they don't, and they won't. Voluntarily.

[–] WheeGeetheCat 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In the usa we did vote for AL gore, who campaigned pretty much solely on stopping climate change.

When it became clear gore would win, the Supreme Court stopped counting ballots and gave the win to Bush, an oil tycoon who went to war for oil. Later Kavanaugh, who worked the case for Bush, was given a lifetime appointment to the same court for their effective cronyism

So yes, the global elite are the reason here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

When saying "global elite", are you refering specifically to the USA elite?

[–] WheeGeetheCat 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The global elite buy the USA politicians. They are for sale internationally

In Bush's case, the family is owned by the Saudis. And the Saudis couldn't have the USA president going after oil.