this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
142 points (100.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5197 readers
872 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
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
view the rest of the comments
I mean it won't change anything much, listening or looking away. Just look at the whole conference, it seems pretty clear to me that there is no motivation to change.
If I learned today that the political meeting to solve the problem climate change is being held in a petro state, lead by an oil sheikh and sponsored by companies that have no ambition to change, I would assume that somebody wants to fool me or it's satire.
What I expect is a lot of talk, self love and emphasis on how great we're doing already, some vague ideas and plans and then back to business as usual.
But still, I think the author of this article is right. There is need to show political leaders, that we don't let us get tricked by their green washing and that we demand more, much more action and that we won't accept empty promises!
It's very tiring to just want to live in a world that doesn't kill us while most business men readily kill the climate for profit. And the hope that the future is worth living is fading quickly. But we need to stand up as long as there is a piece of hope left. We'll likely lose this fight, but at least we tried.
Very well said.
Thats literally modern times.
Lifes better than satire ever could imagine.
There are tons of politicians out there that want to do more. Hardcore green parties, climate advocates, straight up activists. They have been active for years and years.
Nobody votes for them. On the contrary, people are voting increasingly for the exact opposite.
And I mean, why wouldn't they? The climate disaster snowball is so goddamn big now that the actions needed to take to slow it down is growing increasingly extreme. And as the actions grow more extreme, the immediate impact on personal comfort convenience and quality of life grows. Why would anyone vote for something that objectively makes your life worse?
So instead of voting for that, people vote for the status quo. Maybe for those who commit to some token greenwashing at best. Maybe it won't be so bad, they say. Maybe it'll only impact brown people somewhere. Maybe it's not even real to begin with.
And so the snowball grows, the scale of the reactions needed to stop it grow with it, and the cycle perpetuates. As it has for the last several decades.