this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
209 points (98.2% liked)

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

5057 readers
453 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] silence7 20 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There is a distinct racist history to how overpopulation is discussed. High-birth-rate countries tend to be low-emissions-per-capita countries, so overpopulation complaints are often effectively saying "nonwhites can't have kids so that whites can keep burning fossil fuels" or "countries which caused the climate problem shouldn't take in climate refugees."

On top of this, as basic education reaches a larger chunk of the world, birth rates are dropping. We expect to achieve population stabilization this century as a result.

At the end of the day, it's the greenhouse gas concentrations that actually raise the temperature. That means that we need to take steps to stop burning fossil fuels and end deforestation.


[–] kozy138@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago

Yup. Also known as ecofascism.

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Still, the worst thing you can do for the environment, especially if you are a first worlder (as most reading this are), is have a child.

Stopping burning fossil fuels is much harder than it sounds. We need fertilizer from Haber-Bosch, we need tractors, we need trucks shipping food to population centers. Without fossil fuels, I know I am one of the billions that starve. I will probably eat some neighbors first though.

[–] silence7 2 points 8 months ago

We can in fact do all those essential things without fossil fuels. For example, there's a bunch of effort in the US, EU, and China to generate hydrogen via electrolysis from renewables, and then use that as an input to Haber-Bosch, and it's backed by government policy and financial support.

[–] LilNaib 2 points 8 months ago

We need fertilizer from Haber-Bosch

Chemical fertilizer is not only unnecessary, it's tied to poor agricultural approaches. In contrast, farmers who practice regenerative agriculture and/or permaculture don't use it and get excellent yields. A specific example is Gabe Brown, whose farm gets above-average yields compared to neighboring farms and is far more profitable, not needing to take government handouts to stay in business. Meanwhile, the soil at his 5,000 acre farm is far healthier and sequesters many tons of carbon per acre vs. neighboring farms.

For more info, read the book Dirt to Soil by Gabe Brown. You can also read a bit here:

https://soilhealthacademy.org/team/gabe-brown/