this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
25 points (93.1% liked)

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

5229 readers
500 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
25
An actually pretty informative "Casually Explained" about how your individual actions impact the climate (www.youtube.com)
submitted 1 year ago by mo_ztt@lemmy.world to c/climate@slrpnk.net
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ApathyTree@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The whole individual carbon footprint thing is designed to make normal people feel bad and personally responsible, and forget that changes an individual can realistically make absolutely pale in comparison to changes made by companies.

Additionally, the footprint of the individual would be smaller if companies polluted less, but it entirely glosses over that aspect, and makes us feel personally accountable for the damage because we indulge in something now and then. Something created by a company which has all the power, but none of the will, to reduce the impact.

It’s not like we have much actual choice about where our energy comes from, or how our products are made. Nor should we be expected to forgo pleasures in life because the people running companies are evil greedy [removed], and fight against any and all attempts to reign their polluting in..

[–] labsin@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it has to be a bit of both. If we ever want to reach any co2 goal, it'll have to be with both less consumption and less pollution in production. Or a drastic reduction in the population, but let's hope that won't happen.

I do feel like the carbon footprint is a campaign similar to the other green washing campaigns.

I don't think there is any other option than a global co2 tax. It's not like the economic system is going to change any time soon and 'evil greedy basters' are good at minimizing costs so this will have an impact. And this tax will cause polluting product to just cost more so either there use will go down or the tax can be used for other reductions.

There have even been companies that ask for it. They can't justify heavy investments to pollute less if their competitors don't have to.