this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
263 points (99.6% liked)

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

5222 readers
634 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
263
Montana loses fight against youth climate activists in landmark ruling [Ars Technica] (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 year ago by andrewrgross@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tolstoshev@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Scotus to overturn in 3..2..1

[–] davi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

came here to say the same thing and ask others to postulate what their plan is; but then i remembered that this isn't the first time the young tried to push for something and did nothing.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago

The impact is narrow: it forces the state of Montana to review climate impact as part of environmental review of new projects (eg: opening a new coal mine):

The state’s characterization of the court proceeding as a “MEPA trial” and not a climate trial ignored the fact that the MEPA provision at issue was squarely about climate change. By prohibiting the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in environmental reviews, Seeley ruled that provision is at odds with Montana’s constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. At issue here is not how MEPA works, but how the state’s dismissive treatment of climate change endangers the youth plaintiffs and degrades Montana’s environment.

That's kind of a bare minimum start. It'll take a whole lot more to get to where we need to be.

load more comments (8 replies)