this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
50 points (98.1% liked)

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

5239 readers
443 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
50
Washington state's landmark climate law hangs in the balance in November | Voters in Washington state are deciding this fall whether to repeal one of the most progressive climate policies ever passed (abcnews.go.com)
submitted 1 month ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Orbituary@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The area most affected by this is King County. Gas here is about a dollar above the national average.

The political ads are stating that Insley imposed this upon us but don't give context. I will be voting to maintain this law.

[–] iamanoldguy@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Same. I hate that this state is following California in a lot of it's policies but given the state of the world this is a good way to force the fossil fuel companies to behave themselves

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I have seen a good amount of signs to vote yes on repealing the tax here in Seattle (as well as the other initiatives) and only one to vote no. Sent a couple emails to them to see if I can get some signs to place but have not heard back on anything.

[–] Orbituary@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I get force-fed a bunch of crap on my Hulu ads from an initiative led by a conservative think tank guy named Todd Myers. He's not a Trumper, thankfully, but he's no climate sweetheart despite his title and disingenuous affiliations.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

State revenue is up, and I really like

projects on air quality, fish habitat, wildfire prevention and clean energy

I'm a fan of slightly higher gas prices to dissuade consumption, but remember, higher prices disproportionately hit the poor.

theoretically forcing companies to find ways to cut emissions

So, any evidence it's actually working? Guessing the purchase of these allowances are simply passed to the consumer with no effect on behavior. Presumably only businesses that are close to the limit will go all out to get under it and the biggest polluters will budget it as a cost of doing business.

Were I up there, I'd vote to keep it. 2-years isn't nearly long enough to see effects and gather data.