this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2024
152 points (98.7% liked)

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

5238 readers
710 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
152
Heat is deadly. Why does our culture push us to ignore it? (www.vox.com)
submitted 4 months ago by veganpizza69@lemmy.world to c/climate@slrpnk.net
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 19 points 4 months ago

The last sentence ends with:

we are the problem.

The answer to the title question is chasing after short-term profits at the expense of all else - as we all understood perfectly before it was asked - and therefore the true underlying answer is bc clickbait title gets more clicks if it seems to ask a simple question than if it does not.

The article itself seemed mostly fine, if extremely wordy and rambling, but perhaps I was so put out by that "trick" with the title that I did not give it a fair chance - it just bugs me so much when people chase short-term profits to the exclusion of all other considerations, that I find it difficult to look past that effect:-|.