this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2023
24 points (100.0% liked)

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

5306 readers
523 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
[email protected]
24
For The Wall Street Journal, the Climate Call is Coming From Inside the House | When will the Journal’s editorial board wake up to reality? (newrepublic.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Archived copy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] adamaramma 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Editoral Board at the WSJ is the equivalent of 'old man shakes fist at sky'. I habitually read the Opinions section almost daily because I hate myself and the takes included are mostly just bad but the ones penned by the 'Editoral Board' are especially egregious. They read like someone's smarmy grandpa got ahold of Twitter and thinks the libs are why the grandkids don't come visit.

Don't hold your breath that the editorial board will change their tune.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I stopped subscribing to them a long time ago when they published an piece which was in favor of monarchy in the US. Definitely completely out of touch with what works.

I do post gift links to their hard news articles when they cover climate, but am completely dependent on others to share those with me since I'm not willing to financially support their editorial page.

[–] adamaramma 2 points 1 year ago

Oh this wasn't comming at you. It's more that I will shit all over the WSJ editorial board every chance I get.