this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
17 points (100.0% liked)

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

7239 readers
318 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
17
Why we need an 859-year plan to fight climate change (wapo.st)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

My attitude: it is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at liberty to neglect it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago

Indeed, first step is to get people to think on those timescales - and the cathedrals are a good example that people used be able to do that. I make an interactive climate model normally running from 1750 to 2250 (could go further) so it’s ± symmetrical about the present, but society attitudes are not. For example, it’s normal to pay to preserve 'heritage' sites from 100 - 1000 - more years ago, but [most] economists imply (with discount rates) it's crazy to care about it all disappearing under the sea on any similar timescale.