this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
30 points (96.9% liked)

Climate

8486 readers
319 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
30
Water stress by country, measured as freshwater withdrawals relative to renewable water resources (2022) (infosec.pub)
submitted 14 hours ago by Innerworld@lemmy.world to c/climate@slrpnk.net
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 1 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

The UK is more water stressed than Australia ? That seems...unlikely ? Counter intuitive anyway

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 hours ago

This is just looking at water usage/freshwater available. Australia has fairly large rainforests for example. So a lot of water available. At the same time the population is pretty small for such a massive country. The main issue is that the water is in the "wrong" part of Australia. The UK on the other hand is densly populated. So usage is high, while the land although on average probably wetter then Australia is also much smaller.

You have similar things in other countries as well.

[–] cravl@slrpnk.net 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Two random guesses:

  1. The UK has been inhabited for longer and thus many more of its aquifers may have been tapped.
  2. Despite being fairly arid, Australia is just massive comparatively. In combination with number 1, it may have huge aquifers under uninhabited arid regions that are close to full.
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

The UK has very fucked up land management, virtually all the capacity of the land to hold onto water has been destroyed in favour of dumping it into the sea as quickly as possible, the result is a country thats prone to both floods and droughts.