this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
356 points (98.6% liked)

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

5239 readers
480 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dontgooglefinderscult@lemmings.world 13 points 1 week ago (51 children)

Well they'll try. Unfortunately for oil and coal companies, China exists.

[–] federalreverse@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (29 children)

Chinese policy doesn't give a shit about climate change. In fact, Xi is banking on a Northern passageway to Europe permanently unthawing to avoid the partly US-controlled South China Sea.

Xi cares about staying in power until he drops in the 2030s, for that he neess to keep the country stable and the people quiet. So what he really wants is industrial power and rising welfare. He's found that one of the best ways to gain an edge that is to spur useful innovation that wealthier nations will want to adopt.

What this means is that we'll see a lot of climate-friendly technology coming out of China, but the country may not care much about cleaning up its footprint.

[–] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 week ago (28 children)

Even if you are right I'll take doing the right thing for the wrong reasons over the fucking disappointment and self destruction coming from the United States.

Doesn't matter how you spin it, China is objectively better for the world right now.

You can feel morally superior all the way to societal collapse

[–] federalreverse@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You're right in that the whole drill-baby-drill thing is utter self-destruction which may still work passably over the course of the next four years but not beyond. The IRA right now is solid industrial policy and I wish us Europeans were competing. (Wild guess though, the repeal of the IRA will go much like the repeal of the ACA last time around.)

However, my point is that China is in a phase where it's doing more with more, and its motivation is such that that will stay that way. The only reason Chinese emissions are stagnating right now is that their economy is faltering. At this point, the Jevons paradox is simply eating their renewable power/electric car/... gains. Granted, that is preferable to them continuing to buy ever more fossil-fueled cars.

The motivation for producing this technology will, to a degree, determine the outcome: Solar panels off Temu, delivered to your doorstep using a fossil-fueled plane are a thing that exists.

What happens when the importing blocs (US and EU) rethink their climate policy (because right-wing morons think that's a good idea)? Chinese products will adapt quickly.

load more comments (27 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)
load more comments (48 replies)