this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
145 points (100.0% liked)

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

5222 readers
549 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
silence7@slrpnk.net
145
COP28 stinks. Pay attention anyway. The fossil fuel interests attempting to corrupt the high-stakes summit would love nothing more than for us to look away. (heated.world)
submitted 11 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FrozenCorgi@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

There are tons of politicians out there that want to do more. Hardcore green parties, climate advocates, straight up activists. They have been active for years and years.

Nobody votes for them. On the contrary, people are voting increasingly for the exact opposite.

And I mean, why wouldn't they? The climate disaster snowball is so goddamn big now that the actions needed to take to slow it down is growing increasingly extreme. And as the actions grow more extreme, the immediate impact on personal comfort convenience and quality of life grows. Why would anyone vote for something that objectively makes your life worse?

So instead of voting for that, people vote for the status quo. Maybe for those who commit to some token greenwashing at best. Maybe it won't be so bad, they say. Maybe it'll only impact brown people somewhere. Maybe it's not even real to begin with.

And so the snowball grows, the scale of the reactions needed to stop it grow with it, and the cycle perpetuates. As it has for the last several decades.