this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
150 points (97.5% liked)

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

5244 readers
309 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
150
The New Space Race Is Causing New Pollution Problems | Earth’s stratosphere has never seen the amounts of emissions and waste from rockets and satellites that a booming space economy will leave behind (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 10 months ago by silence7 to c/climate
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

well i was contrasting how say, the hubble telescope is a worthwhile satellite that will eventually burn up in the atmosphere, while starlink is wasteful....

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Hubble is so far away it won't reenter for a very long time. And that's 1 versus 12000.

[–] xor@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago

what is your point?
my point is you're agreeing with me a lot but misinterpreting me entirely... so you're trying to argue with me.
...
i'll repeat my point reeeeeally simply:
yes, starlink wasteful, bad satellites.
some satellites good, like hubble.