this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2026
205 points (98.1% liked)

Canada

12156 readers
741 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 22 points 1 day ago (5 children)

If we stopped cold turkey today I was under the impression it's gonna get even worse anyways from lag time of the consequences of what we've already polluted. Smoke for the rest of my summer days, correct me if I'm wrong.

[–] notabot@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

It would be a bit like stopping smoking. We'd see some improvements almost straight away, as someone mentioned, look back at the covid lockdowns, but there would also be slower responding, longer term, benefits. The sooner we start, the sooner we get there, and you might not have smoky summers for the rest of your days.

[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When COVID hit and everyone did the stay at home thing we felt the effects almost instantly. Waterways cleared up and air quality improved significantly.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I remember this but I also don't know if/how it will affect heat wave and ice caps.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

but I also don't know if/how it will affect heat wave and ice caps.

Yes, there will be a lag to see those impacts improve. Years long. Probably multiple decades.

But that's always going to be the case. And the longger the damage is allowed to compound, the longer it will take for the system to recover once we eventually stop fucking it up.

[–] Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, it's a sunk cost, we may as well just keep destroying the habitabilty of the planet since we've come this far, we ain't no quitters.

[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We don't stop till it's Venus lads, roll coal! launches 4 bazillion satellites who needs O Zone either, let's GOOOO

[–] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

who needs O Zone either

sad numa numa noises

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If we stopped burning oil today, entirely, worldwide, the environment should stabilize around temperatures in about 10 years. That'd be a start. That figure also assumes the arctic permafrost hasn't thawed far enough to keep pushing temps itself.

But yes I've read timelines of 100+ years to see real improvement.

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

That figure also assumes the arctic permafrost hasn't thawed far enough to keep pushing temps itself.

That figure would be making a very incorrect assumption.

Wait until summer 2027, then no one will be able to deny this.

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 day ago

Wish you were wrong.

It's depressing how few people know that. Like you think it's bad, it's going to get worse your whole life even if we stop everything today, now.

I think it's maybe too scary of a verified truth for many people to even register. Like most people's brains are protecting them by blocking them from understanding it.