this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
110 points (98.2% liked)

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

5246 readers
460 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
[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net -5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Only 43% of Americans are for a government run health care system according to the Gallup polls you just provided. That basically excludes single payer health care. What Democrats believe does not matter, as it does not win elections.

Politicans try to judge public sentiment and what it could turn into and only do act, when something is populare. Even then they are more likely to not do it, but for the most part they try to be reelected. Hence trying to appease donors and the public. The simple dumb truth is that climate activists in the US have failed to lay the groundwork for a strong climate policy. Most only just agree that something should be done. Actually doing something, which requires some sort of sacrifice is not going to happen.

The advantage of having somebody like Harris is that they are more likely to actually enact left leaning policies, if they are populare enough. Never expect them to do anything even when necessary, if it destroys their chance of reelection. This also includes all other politicans and last time I checked a president needs the approval of the House to enact laws.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That is absolutely disgusting gaslighting you’re doing. You’re either a healthcare-employee or you’re just an absolute goon of an idiot.

Nice cherry picking. Now do Democrats, you corporatist cuck.

72% of Democrats in favor of a government-run system

[–] Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So what you’re saying is it is genuinely damage reduction to work towards the destruction of the US because Americans are so selfish they will overconsume the planet into massive environmental degradation.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

More that the US media and politicians are controlled by capitalism and they are not going to do anything hurting that, unless they face a large enough movement, which could actually hurt them. So the best course is to elect the least corrupt politician(and they all are corrupt), who might have some morals in them, to then force them to take action.

Also the US desperately needs stronger and more left leaning institutions.