this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
41 points (93.6% liked)

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

5243 readers
469 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
41
The world’s biggest plant to pull carbon from the sky just opened | Experts say we’ll need carbon capture to offset stubborn emissions that can’t easily be cut with existing green technology. (wapo.st)
submitted 6 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

the plant is designed to remove 36,000 metric tons of carbon each year, the equivalent of taking 8,600 cars off the road.

In short, for removal like this to make a meaningful difference, and not just function as a PR exercise, we'll need to cut emissions to almost zero.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 14 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Realized CCS recovery is like 25% lower than expected, and highly variable.

Remind me again why we pour billions into this? It's definitely not just so we can continue what we are doing, without actually doing anything, is it?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 17 points 6 months ago

It's mostly being funded as a means of creating social permission to keep on extracting and burning without actually doing CCS

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, its so that more people become awfully rich or the people who are already awfully rich are awfully richer. Public money is the easiest to steal

[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 2 points 6 months ago

Muh TaX WrItE OfFs

[–] leds@feddit.dk 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

To put a realistic price on carbon emmissions, now we know exactly what a tonne of CO2 costs so we can impose that as a tax.

[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yet, how do you do that? Cost to produce said tonne? Societal cost of damage? Ecological cost, estimated in terms of reduced biodiversity? All of these costs change with time too. It's a tough one for sure.

[–] leds@feddit.dk 1 points 6 months ago

Use the cost for removing it so that you can pay someone to clean up.