this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
58 points (92.6% liked)

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

5205 readers
914 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]
58
Will Harris go after Big Oil? The candidate has kept her climate policy vague so far, but her record as a prosecutor gives climate activists hope. (yaleclimateconnections.org)
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Narrator: No, she won't.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah, I don't see it.

As a matter of electoral politics, oil production is still popular in swing states like Pennsylvania, and having a noncommittal stance towards domestic oil companies might cause a few oil billionaires not to back Trump (whose own policies are a little bit too erratic and chaotic to allow the business world in general to count on profit/prosperity under a Trump term).

As a matter of policy, domestic oil production is an important tool in countering Russian and Saudi interests. Strong domestic oil production gives the United States more incentive to tighten restrictions on Russian sanctions (without hurting domestic economic interests), and in weakening Saudi price-setting power through OPEC.

Fracking is terrible for the environment. But there are reasons why energy policy looks to more than just environmental issues.

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

Not just Russia and Saudi, but also Iran and Venezuela.

Oh and hurting those producers helps the US economy as it is an oil and gas exporter.

At the same time lowering the US oil and gas consumption can solve that problem too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Why do people put all their criticisms on a politician whose job is to be popular with people who make bad decisions, rather than the states and people in them forcing her hand?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Probably not, but she won't gut the EPA either, and the Biden administration did send out truckloads of money to deal with oil and gas emissions in the form of Climate Pollution Reduction Grants, so she is clearly the better candidate on this issue.