this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
132 points (99.3% liked)

Climate

8919 readers
974 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Pika@sh.itjust.works 13 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

In the northern locations they got a really bad name early on because the early models didn't do jack in colder climates, so it didn't make sense to have the pump and an additional heat source ontop of it so many just went to having a lone heat source like a furnace.

Since then they have steadily improved in tech and if you get the right type are good for locations that don't go under -23C (-10 F) but, they still have a bad name due to the experiences with the early tech.

[โ€“] HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 hours ago

Northern places like Scandinavia?