this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2024
148 points (94.0% liked)

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

5276 readers
630 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
148
Why billionaires should take the lead and declare their own emissions cutting targets (theconversation.com)
submitted 10 months ago by silence7 to c/climate
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I prefer the proletariat take the lead and start cutting a little off the top of the billionaires shoulders.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's weird to me that billionaires are not actively campaigning to solve climate change.

I, personally, could happily die aged 87, on a clean planet, surrounded by family, on a small expensive boat.

Rather than at 67, on a mega yacht, in a toxic wasteland, surrounded by the bodies of dead body-guards.

It doesn't seem like a really challenging choice, to me.

It's not rocket science to see where this trend line leads. We should all cooperate to fix this shit, now, using laws and science.

[–] wanderingmeomeo 3 points 10 months ago

Eh, they don't care precisely because they believe they have the privilege to shield themselves, and their descendants from environmental catastrophe. Luxurious fallout bulkers are built right now to do just that: protect themselves and their children from iminent threats, be it mob riots or tsunami or nuclear fallout. They don't give a shit about the rest of us, and why would they? What do they have to gain from caring about us, it's just not in their interest to do that when they could afford to survive through this and we don't. They've already won the logic of the free market in a bloodthirsty, capital-centric world then surely they earned their superiority, and their place as the true, deserving heirs of the Earth reborn. Looking through their eyes, it's just natural selection.