this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
149 points (98.1% liked)

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

5245 readers
257 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
 

Our findings reveal widespread support for climate action. Notably, 69% of the global population expresses a willingness to contribute 1% of their personal income, 86% endorse pro-climate social norms and 89% demand intensified political action. Countries facing heightened vulnerability to climate change show a particularly high willingness to contribute. Despite these encouraging statistics, we document that the world is in a state of pluralistic ignorance, wherein individuals around the globe systematically underestimate the willingness of their fellow citizens to act.

This suggests that actions which provide social proof that large numbers of people are interested in action (eg: a mass march) are likely to spur further action.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago (3 children)

69% of the global population expresses a willingness to contribute 1% of their personal income

Giving money is easing. Not eating meat and not flying to vacations and not using a car and not importing Avocados and not buying a new phone every year aren’t.

People are willing to endorse climate action as long as it doesn’t affect them.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago (2 children)

This is a global survey; most of the world isn't flying or eating much meat.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Those who don’t aren’t the ones causing climate change, so what’s the point in asking their support?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Because they have power to refuse to be fossil fuel extraction colonies

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

No they don’t, any nation on top of fossil fuels that refuses to export them will face invasion or a coup.

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

Those that do more than make up for those that do not.

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

The point is that people are willing to make some level of personal sacrifice

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

It's very different doing those things willingly when all options are still there around you and a lot of other people are doing it anyway. And being in support of policies to reduce for example meat eating for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

That map is interesting for Canada and the US...

Only 30-40% of people think they should contribute 1% or less of their income to fix the problem. But 70-80% think we and the government should do more about it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Well let's be honest, we're already paying a fuckton of taxes, pick my 1% from there.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

What counts as a fuckton of taxes?

No seriously, in the US you pay half to a third of what you would have paid between the thirties and the nineties depending on income bracket. If your rich you pay two thirds of what you did in the seventies. If your a major corporation you pay just two fifths of what you did in the sixties.

I get taxes feel expensive, but even just compared to the historical rate in the US you pay a fraction of what was normal for a few generations ago. Compared to other western nations in Europe or for instance Canada, the difference is even more stark.

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

Canada is sus af with the tax revenue. Our roads are crumbling, hospitals closing, schools underfunded, antiquated military, and yet we spend so much in taxes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

My first guess is someone isn’t paying their fair share and leaving it to less affluent individuals to pick up the slack.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The majority of people are not the problem. Politicians, big corporations and billionaires are.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

Well, until the capitalist ruling class agrees, we're all fucked.