this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2024
96 points (97.1% liked)

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

5237 readers
495 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
96
Rivers are the West’s largest source of clean energy. What happens when drought strikes? (grist.org)
submitted 6 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/climate@slrpnk.net
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pumpkinseedoil@feddit.de 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You can argue about how green it is, considering its impact on ecosystems, but how did they end at the conclusion that it's not renewable?

[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago

We already had so much of it, the renewable targets would have been too easy? Most dams use huge amounts of concrete or earth moving, and there’s no carbon-free way to do that work at this time? Policy makers didn’t want to incentivize any dam construction?

These are guesses. It’s probably in some kind of records. Sometimes laws even explain the rationale in the beginning with a bunch of “whereas” statements. But I’m too lazy to look it up right now.