this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
17 points (77.4% liked)

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

5240 readers
458 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
[email protected]
17
Why Harris Is Backpedaling on Fracking (newrepublic.com)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Archived copies of the article: archive.today ghostarchive.org web.archive.org

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Your logic makes sense, and I’m sure most people in power agree with you, but this still seems like a situational excuse to me. There will always be a reason not to ditch dangerous extraction methods. Right now it may be Russia, next time maybe it’s a Gulf state. While it might matter to this moment’s geopolitical situation, the safety, health, and longevity of the planet and all its inhabitants are significantly more important than our ability to temporarily harm Russia’s economy. I’m also not convinced this is causing as much pain to Russia as we might like. They always seem to have a way of avoiding the worst of our economic warfare.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

True. But reforming the Russian economy is a necessary pre-requisite to stopping climate change, something very seldom discussed because of how frankly near-impossible it is. This might be our only opportunity.

They're one of the few countries that might actually benefit significantly from climate change, due to opening arctic seaways and ports, and the massive disruptions it would cause to all their rivals. Their government style makes the migrations it would cause a minimal risk for them, and suffering and death does not seem to concern them much.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

If reform is infeasible, there are other ways to lessen the impact of Russian exports. All are brutal and will hurt ordinary Russian people. But if necessary for the survival of humankind, someone will attempt them.