this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
62 points (97.0% liked)

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

5178 readers
1182 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
62
One California City Wants to Get Rid of Gas | Residents of liberal Berkeley will get to vote on a second attempt to curb use of the fuel in buildings. (www.bloomberg.com)
submitted 1 day ago by silence7 to c/climate
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

For context, having it in your house seems to knock a couple years off your life expectancy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] D1G17AL@lemmy.world -1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

What evidence do you have that it would be cost-ineffective to pipe natural gas to only businesses? The only thing they do these days when someone opts out of using natural gas is turn off the valve at the street. The gas still flows to other businesses and neighbors. It doesn't matter what Berkeley does because Oakland, Richmond, Hayward and every other town or city around Berkeley is not going to ban the use of natural gas. It's a non-starter. It's pointless to do.

[–] silence7 2 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

There has been a ton of modeling on how declining numbers of ratepayers cause methane gas prices to skyrocket. If you actually get rid of almost all the people buying it, the last few are left paying a fortune for what was once common infrastructure shared by many people.

[–] spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago

Right. And once it gets rolling, the disconnect (electrification) rate will undoubtedly increase. The sooner folks understand this, the sooner we can all get along to managing the wind down of the gas infrastructure in an intelligent way.

[–] D1G17AL@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not saying it's pointless but uh...https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/billionaires-emit-more-carbon-pollution-90-minutes-average-person-does-lifetime

[–] silence7 2 points 10 hours ago

There are only tiny numbers of billionaires, and we need to get emissions to zero to stabilize temperatures, so we're all going to need to pitch in, even if that means something like "change how we heat and cook" instead of "switch to sailboats instead of diesel mega-yachts and private jets"