this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
48 points (72.2% liked)

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

5296 readers
742 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Who do those big companies and massive organizations (?!) produce for?

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It would be a good rebuttal if there wasn't all the marketing and ads to consume.

Ad agencies literally study what works and what doesn't, always refining their techniques, so that they can sell you more shit.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you're susceptible to ads then that is also on you.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Literally not. This is human nature. If you think you aren't affected by ads, think again.

Marketing has researched what triggers our animal response, and we are affected to varying degrees. Some people more, some people less.

But you most likely bought something because you saw an ad.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 0 points 2 months ago

Oh I am definitely affected by ads, because I'm completely fucking allergic to them. If I see an ad, I immediately don't want to have anything to do with the product, and if it is a website I close it immediately if it forces me to watch it.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Generally consumers, and I agree with your overall sentiment, but other major exchanges of goods and energy include things like military and essential services.

I'm making changes where I can, but I can't just refuse medical services because my doctor doesn't use a free-range organic MRI, and me bringing a reusable bag to the grocery store does nothing to reduce the amount of toxic waste the US military lights on fire every year.

I need internet, but there's only one provider in my area. If my house is on fire or I call an ambulance, I don't care what kind toxic gases are coming out of the first responder's tailpipes.

I'll still continue to fly less, buy less, drive my EV, swap my gas appliances, procure renewable electricity, and use more sustainable products. It's not going to solve all of the worlds problems, but I do think collective action has the potential to drive a significant amount of the global transition to lower emissions.

The rest is done at the polls.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

Edward Bernays