There is nothing else to do. We went beyond the tipping point on warming and those in charge didn't listen. It only gets worse from here.
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
37 points (91.1% liked)
No Stupid Questions
48702 readers
1415 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Build infrastructure to make Europe more heat tolerant.
A lot of what Americans do to deal with the heat, like air conditioning and ice water, need to get adopted in Europe. As for the concern of the energy needed to power air conditioners, most demand generally follows peak solar production. Also, if you install heat pumps instead of normal air conditioners, it will help lower carbon requirements for heating.
As well as planting trees we need to stop concreting over gardens.
Our hyper individualist mindset and society will also have to go, because this is a problem that will require each of us doing our part together and becoming more fairer to each other and the Earth.
We treat the world like crap because we think it is crap, when it is just us that are crap. So in order to change the way we behave to the world we have to change the way we behave to each other. Otherwise we will never come together and agree on any coherent plan to stave off climate change.
Climate change is a problem that will be either the making or ending of us, and it's up to us which of those will happen.
A time machine
That's the thing about climate change.
One place can do everything right..if the other countries in the world doesn't do the same everyone is fucked regardless.
Also, what you’re doing now will have an effect a decade or more down the road
NO! This is not just false, it's dangerously false.
If a country takes measures to emit 500M less tons of CO2 per year, the result is... 500M less tons of CO2 in the air per year than otherwise. That helps!
There isn't a single fucked/not fucked threshold. There are a lot of nuances of fucked and each one we dodge puts us in an incrementally less awful place. Who knows how many more lives saved for each Mton CO2 not produced. Who knows how many species get to live, how many fewer days of heatwave per year, how many more glaciers survive.
I STG, "we're already fucked anyway" is oil shill talk. Fuck that noise, let's make oil obsolete, let's avoid entire shades of fucked, we've already made insane progress with renewables and electric cars, let's just keep going! Let's pressure our individual politicians because you know the fuckers love it when you give up! You on board?
If a country takes measures to emit 500M less tons of CO2 per year, the result is… 500M less tons of CO2 in the air per year than otherwise. That helps!
Not if that country just offloads industry to another country. This is what the west is doing, offloading dirty industry to China, then pointing fingers at China.
"Nobody else is doing anything about it so why should we go slightly without and pay slightly more to do our part?"
- pretty much everyone at the same time, unironically.
End all fossil fuel use asap and make trade blocks that prefer countries that do the same. Tarrifs for those that use dirty fuels beyond the Eurobloc's schedule.
Remember, even if we stopped today, there is a 20 year lag time so it's getting way, way worse.
https://www.iea.org/energy-system/fossil-fuels#tracking
We are still growing fossil fuel use. The repercussions are enormous, and effectively, permanent.
At this point we need to spend all of our effort in advancing ways we can pull carbon out of the atmosphere and ocean, we are fucked unless we find an efficient way to do so.
Yes, but I don't believe there is any process could ever be efficient enough.
Deep ocean algae farms might do it. Oil companies have brought up and side lined research on it for decades however.
But that would hurt fossil fuel companies, so we can't do that. (/jk)
It appears that Europe does many things right for sustainability and climate change - public transit over cars, recycling, reducing carbon footprint better compared to other parts of the world.
No. It wasn't enough by far
There have been many right ideas, but what has actually been done was only a tiny little change, not significant.
Interesting. What are a couple things Europe should do to reduce it's carbon footprint?
Europe is already better per capita than most regions. not much point in getting Europeans to cut C02 more when Americans are still driving tanks and burning coal.
Stop burning things (oil, gas, ...).
(Stop does not mean reduce by 3%)
Stop producing and buying so many animals for food.
Grow new woods (real large, not tiny).
nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming. if we end all fossil fuel burning, concrete production, and livestock production tomorrow, the atmosphere will continue to warm for hundreds of years before peaking. We are cooked. Grab your popcorn.
my brother in christ we will be the pop corn
nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming.
What if (theoretically speaking, because I don't think we're close yet) we rolled out carbon-capture technology and implementation on a massive scale? How much useful impact would that have on mitigating CC versus how much of that is still out of our hands?
This. What part of "well past the tipping point" do people not understand? The time to take drastic action was 20 years ago. It's "adapt or die" time. The good news is, the elderly are more vulnerable so that should help with the population decline issue.
And yet we must stop climate change instead of making it even worse.
Sorry. But this comment made me think of this:
Anyway? We’re fucked and the game now is to mitigate and adapt.
Methinks this needs policy-level changes. There's only so much we can do individually at this point
Immediate terms: There's nothing that can be done to curb the heatwave IMO, but there are ways to prevent danger. Namely, AC, cooling centers, public education on preventing heat-related injuries/deaths... Maybe govts can even temporarily reduce regulations/give subsidies on split-systems to help nudge some folks, but nothing much else can be done. One pet-idea I have is cooling centers, since I know Houston (which has extreme weathers) opens cooling/warming centers when the weather is too extreme; it is a very progressive implementation that benefits those who are underprivileged
Slightly longer term: Trees/green spaces always help. Public transit systems always help. Some fairly sweeping changes in climate-related regulation (ease AC regulations, tighten car regulations, tax on pollution, etc), aimed at both reducing danger and improving the climate... or at least recuperate some "pollution tax" so the govt can use the money to plant more trees and build more trains. Also some European countries can do so much better at discouraging car use (or at least switch to EVs) given how good the train networks are; for countries without good train networks, build some
Even longer term: Massive investments in green energy; if they are investing already, invest more. But be practical... temporary solutions like nuclear are not everyone's cup of tea but they help with the transition. Do better on international collaboration. Find ways to discourage international trading partners from over-polluting (probably a combination of tariffs and negotiations... not my specialty).
Obligatory not an economist/political scientist, there are probably better ways to implement these than what I suggested
Your last point should be first. Europe (and the UK) are reducing their carbon output but our success is dwarfed by the increase in co2 output by China and India. The US has also made no effort to reduce emissions but because industry there is declining it hasn't increased for a few years. We need to apply a carbon tax to imports from those countries.
Wouldn’t simply addressing climate change generally be the answer? I don’t understand why this might be confusing.
Because billionaires make that impossible.
The CEO of starbucks lives in LA. The HQ of starbucks is in Seattle.
He COULD move the HQ to LA. He COULD buy a 2nd house in Seattle.
Instead he takes his own personal commercial jet DAILY from LA to Seattle, and back again. Every day.
There is a commercial jet that flies the skies, using up fuel, and burning through the atmosphere 365 days a year.
All because this fuckwit doesn't want to have a ZOOM meeting.
That's one billionaire. One. Now think of the fact that 1 billionaire on average creates more environmental damage than 1 million regular people combined.
And that's ONE. Now think of all the billionaires in the world. Combined.
And then there's America. I live in America. If I need something from the store, I'll walk. Yeah, it may be a 15 minute walk. Each way. But, c'mon. It's not that far. By the time you look for your keys, and open the garage, and start the car, and everything, you're looking at 5-10 minutes anyways. May as well just walk. I got a little wagon I use to carry all my groceries. It handles 750lbs.
Now, every car on the road, doing these short little trips. It feels like not much, but it adds up.
On top of all that, I have a theory that paved surfaces retain natural heat, and in the case of black tar surfaces, RAISE the heat.
As opposed to grass, which would lower it.
But billionaire or middle class, nobody wants to give up their ammenities. Even if the planet suffers. Guess we'll all just die in an inferno.
should the EU take action against billionaires or the US to address climate change? I suppose they could impose sanctions, fines, or something to save EU lives?
Or Guillitines. I'm good with that too.
Many people seem comfortable with bringing back guillotines, including me. It would be interesting to see the reaction.
Lemme tell you man, i don’t think you can sound more impersonal and alien then you are doing now. Yes I would vote to do something about, yes. Maybe some hanging is required.
Yes, they should.
Trumo's threat to impose new, higher, tariffs on EU for starting to legislate against US tech monopolies and support local startups show how it would go.
But better to put it forwards under the chicken taco and make headway, and then future US leaders (if any) would have to make open moves against environmental measures.
The EU could take steps towards less dependency of the US (and other continents for that matter)
Absolutely should.
But the EU would like to continue to benefit from US military power and espionage while getting to pretend it is more moral. If the EU were to more overtly break with the US it would have to dramatically reformulate its neo-colonial economics.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ideally, yes. But we're way past the point where mitigation alone can solve this. We need climate change adaptation, too.
load more comments
(2 replies)
According to the UN and other organizations: To PREVENT the heatwaves, it is crucial that the amount of CO2 released globally is reduced. All nations need to tighten laws to lower CO2 production. This means you need to VOTE for the right party. To MITIGATE the effects of the heatwaves, countries can do many things: plant trees in towns (as they lower temperatures due to evaporation and shade), improve architecture etc. That may not help too much though, as the intensity and length of the heatwaves will continue to increase over the next decades. So reduction of CO2 released is the best bet.
europe needs to invest in ACs, apparently the continent temperatures rises alot faster than other continents as for an immediate solution, long term, they need to accelerate into green energy.
More green wouldn't hurt. The city I live in invested heavily in removing green space. Shrubs and plants are nearly all removed and the remaining empty grass fields are continuously cut. Having green space cools the city down, gives shade and helps animals, so how about we plant things and stop cutting everything?
In the USA, we cover everything we can with black asphalt, and those expansive parking lots means you can't walk anywhere.
The interesting question for the US is “can we be doing anÿhing to make things worse than we already are?”
I have generally found the lack of urban trees in Europe pretty shocking. Even in wide open squares where there's no reason not to have them it's often just cobblestones. While Europe is certainly cooler than where I live, even so it seems like it would be very hot and unpleasant if the weather gets even a bit warm.
Some countries like France and the Netherlands are doing some good work on this lately but it needs to be more widespread and unfortunately it will take some time to pay dividends.
And yes we need to decarbonize more aggressively. It may be a bit painful but less so than the pain of inaction.
Eat less meat, beef in particular.
I already abstain from beef for environmental reasons. And limit my dairy too.
I heard that the local nut farms in my region consume a lot of ground water. and the majority of their sales are abroad, so I try to eat less nuts now too. I don't want to support nut farms in my area that majority focus on selling abroad or to far away places, because us locals need that ground water more than their profits.
view more: next ›