Hope so, but politicians subsidising coal companies (definitely not for personal benefit) is the standard here. Environmental science is denied, and even for the non far-right parties, background deals ruin progress (looking at you albo).
this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
44 points (100.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
7192 readers
229 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
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
Could have voted Green, voted for shit lite instead, what a debacle.
https://slrpnk.net/post/21579845
https://slrpnk.net/post/21579845
There's widespread support for this amongst voters, just witness the recent Australian election for proof of that. Where >90% of voters voted against any action. I.e didn't Vote Green
Compound that with near zero understanding of climate change, the pervasive view is slightly warmer summers and AC is the answer and not much to worry about vs the seemingly ever more likely exestntial risk
See the link above to an article about increased coal production from Australia and the insanity of the defence of the orthodoxy.