this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
154 points (96.4% liked)

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

5279 readers
885 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
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is the way humans have always been and it is not just the USA. I will be dead before the worst affects hit is the justification many think but few are willing to express. Around the world ground water is being used at rates that are thousands of time faster than replenishment.

When the water runs out, mass starvation will soon begin.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Or a big drop in animal agriculture and biofuels

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That will also happen but it will not stop the hunger.

Food exports will dry up as countries hold their food for their own people (See: India's ban on rice exports) and the countries that cannot feed their own populations will implode.

The Arab spring started as protests over a jump in food prices.

[–] w00tabaga@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To think that getting rid of those two things is a silver bullet is naive.

People like to shit on animal agriculture. However, you have to consider that only about 3% of the earth’s entire surface is suitable for agriculture, and even less to grow most of the crops we eat. Animals can be raised on land that’s not suitable for crops. It spreads out where we use our water, which is a good thing. Animal agriculture also gives us a plethora of goods besides just meat, and again, it’s goods from land that otherwise we cannot farm.

As with all things in life, there are better and worse ways to go about it, but animal agriculture isn’t ruining the planet in itself.

Secondly, the problem with biofuels is it should be replaced with nuclear, and getting hungry isn’t going to change that, a lot of people are just going to die from starvation and violence directly caused by starvation.

[–] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Animal agriculture is not ruining the planet itself, yes.

But

Animal Agriculture emits nearly 60% of greenhouse gases from food production.

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

What proportion of total co2 emissions stem from food production?

[–] w00tabaga@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

About half of production between that and crops? That’s actually not bad. Not bad besides the total, but that’s a good split imo

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's because there isn't one.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is this very thought that prevents reform.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't thought that prevents reform.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thoughts lead to actions, of which inaction based on defeatist ideas literally encouraged by the fossil fuels industries is included.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago

This is literally idealism; the theory that political action comes from ideas.

Ideas matter, but they can only reinforce the structural and material base.

[–] Nicenightforawalk@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m about to read the article but commenting first to take a guess somehow nestlé is involved

[–] aeternum@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

what humans use PAILS in comparisson to what the animals we eat use. Stop eating animals!

[–] RadicalCandour@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can understand why you’re getting downvoted. People don’t want to stop eating animals. I know I don’t. But we really should. You’re right, it’s horrible for the planet. I for one am looking forward to the lab grown meat future.

[–] mrpants@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why even lab grown? I've eaten burgers from vegan shops that I prefer to meat ones. They're meatier and tastier than every other meat based burger in their price range.

Of course not every restaurant is this good yet but I have a feeling it'll outpace the rate of lab grown meat availability.

Why even lab grown? Because people will not give up meat. Humans want fat and muscle protein without the cruelty and waste.
I’m all for vegan options as well. I love me a well made vegan burger.

[–] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

People Eat Tasty Animals!

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

animals mostly eat parts of plants that people can't or won't eat, so in that way they help us conserve resources.

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Haha what the hell are you talking about, a third of cropland is literally dedicated to growing livestock feed. Livestock also directly contributes 7% of greenhouse gas emissions by shitting alone.

This is directly from the FAO: https://www.fao.org/3/ar591e/ar591e.pdf

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

a third of cropland is literally dedicated to growing livestock feed

that's not what your source says. and all of agriculture is about 20% of our emissions, but i'd be fine if it were 100%: we need to eat.

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Twenty-six percent of the Planet's ice-free land is used for livestock grazing and 33 percent of croplands are used for livestock feed production.

Dude, it's one of the first things written on the first page. Come on now, this is embarassing.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

33 percent of croplands are used for livestock feed production.

but not exclusively for livestock feed production. it's not "dedicated".

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is what this user posted and embarrassingly deleted before writing the comment above:

grazing lands aren't croplands

If you can't even be bothered to read a full quote that was handed to you, you aren't discussing in good faith. You can go ahead and fuck off with your hand wavy non-scientific bullshit. Learn to read a source and provide a proper rebuttal with evidence instead of spamming nonsense.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago

calling me a spambot doesn't change whether i'm right, or you're literate.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 year ago

Learn to read a source and provide a proper rebuttal with evidence instead of spamming nonsense.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 1 year ago

You can go ahead and fuck off with your hand wavy non-scientific bullshit.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 1 year ago

this is clearly a bad-faith attempt to avoid the fact that im right: in feeding animals the unwanted parts of our crops, animals actually help conserve water.

[–] RadicalCandour@startrek.website 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not sure if this report mentions it but I remember reading recently that we’ve pumped so much ground water out of the earth, it’s affected the tilt of the fucking planet. Man we are a shithole species.

[–] Domille@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

We are an invasive species for the entire planet...

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Extracting groundwatee in the death valley in order to make a golf is the most insane example

[–] exohuman@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

We need nuclear power stations all along the coast converting sea water into fresh water.

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And a string of nuclear power stations to pump the water where it needs to be...

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And small nuclear power generators to power all the maintenance cars and trucks.

[–] tgirod@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

Just to be sure this is sarcasm, right ?

[–] toothpicks@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

And then we can pour the nuclear waste back into the sea! Just kidding 😂 I'm not anti-nuclear

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

American companies and local governments implementing unsustainable projects that will only face consequences once they're gone?

They would never!

[–] Sharpiemarker@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

There isn't much of one

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The earth cannot sustain this many people indefinitely.

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 year ago

That's not true. The vast majority of water overuse is industrial (including wasteful farm practices) and commercial. Gandhi said it well:

There is enough in this world for every man's need, but not enough for every man's greed.