this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
372 points (98.2% liked)

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

5297 readers
775 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
372
Ban private jets to address climate crisis, says Thomas Piketty (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago by GreyShuck@feddit.uk to c/climate
46 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Questions of social and economic class must be at the centre of our response to the climate crisis, to address the huge inequalities between the carbon footprints of the rich and poor and prevent a backlash against climate policies, the economist Thomas Piketty has said.

Regulations will be needed to outlaw goods and services that have unnecessarily high greenhouse gas emissions, such as private jets, outsized vehicles, and flights over short distances, he said in an interview with the Guardian.

Rich countries must also put in place progressive carbon taxes that take into account people’s incomes and how well they are able to reduce their emissions, as current policies usually fail to adjust for people’s real needs.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ExFed@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Agreed.

I feel like the "ban X" trend is extremely lazy. The real problem is that carbon emissions are an externality; the cost of emissions aren't factored into the cost of doing business. It's basic economics. Industry, commerce, and consumers have no reason to account for carbon emissions, and so the overwhelming systemic pressure is to continue business at usual.

Carbon emissions aren't "immoral" in the same sense that theft or murder are, but they absolutely impose an ecological cost. Outlawing carbon emissions is not only unreasonable and politically impossible, but I would also argue unethical. As much as we altruistically fight to find alternatives, it's likely that several industries vital to our economy will have to continue to emit carbon. The least we can do is compensate society for the shared ecological cost.