this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
125 points (99.2% liked)

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

5189 readers
566 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
125
The system that moves water around the Earth is off balance for the first time in human history (edition.cnn.com)
submitted 1 week ago by GreeNRG@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/14516231

The consequences will be even more catastrophic without urgent action. The water crisis threatens more than 50% of global food production and risks shaving an average of 8% off countries’ GDPs by 2050, with much higher losses of up to 15% projected in low-income countries, the report found.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mardanfarrox@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Will this increase shareholder profits??

Our idiocy is killing ourselves for a few people, I just wish more people gave a shit about this.

[–] jonuno@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

its designed to make people not worry until the last moment. education would change things but can not compete with entertainment.

[–] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

No, but it will increase the fraction of total global capital that is owned by the shareholders, and isn't that what really matters?

[–] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 44 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the economy!?

[–] GreeNRG@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Or the 50% of global food production that is mentioned to be impacted.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

Nestlé:

sounds like a market opportunity

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Maybe Kamala Harris will be against fracking again in 4 more years.

[–] jaemo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

Yeah, right lest we forget, it's Kamala who wants to frack and not the industry, the pickup driving rig pig voters she needs or the lobby. What the FUCK ever. I can't roll my eyes hard enough.

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If it didn’t take Pennsylvania to with the electoral college she might not have to support it. But our voting system is fucked, so to get an actual decent person elected, they have to play games.

Once you understand or admit how the game must be played, you’ll realize how stupid these types of comments are.