this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
716 points (98.6% liked)

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

5316 readers
896 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]
716
‘Megayachts’ are environmentally indefensible. The world must ban them. (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 11 months ago by lettruthout to c/[email protected]
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“The rich gazed at their superyachts, and decided they were not enough. The new breed of megayachts, which are at least 70 metres (230ft) in length, may be the most expensive moveable assets ever created.”

“First and foremost, owning a megayacht is the most polluting activity a single person can possibly engage in. Abramovich’s yachts emit more than 22,000 tonnes of carbon every year, which is more than some small countries. Even flying long-haul every day of the year, or air-conditioning a sprawling palace, would not get close to those emissions levels.

The bulk of these emissions happen whether or not a yacht actually travels anywhere. Simply owning one – or indeed building one – is an act of enormous climate vandalism.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] porksoda 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This is why I fucking hate the do your part bullshit.

Same thing with water usage. Our house had a nice, normal-sized lawn and we basically had to kill it a few years ago when the CA drought was really bad. It was a bummer because our house looked nice, but big picture, I understood why water restrictions were in place and did my part.

Meanwhile, there are 120+ golf courses in the Palm Springs/Coachella Valley area. Residential water usage in the state of CA accounts for like 10% of water usage and I'm over here having to kill my lawn. It was hard to reconcile those facts.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

California would probably have plenty of water if they didn't allow the cultivation of thirsty crops in the goddamn desert. Everyone talks about California regulations (there are some silly ones), but what sticks out to me the most is the corporate shit they refuse to regulate.

[–] asteriskeverything 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

SO. MUCH. FARMING.

why the fuck is a decades long drought stricken state responsible for so many water heavy crops???? Or any crops really???

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

It's especially weird since we export so much water too. L.A. just happens to take... An inordinate amount.

[–] Pipoca 2 points 11 months ago

Water law in the west is really weird.

It was developed around the idea that the first mine in an area could use the water that they wanted, and the next mine in the area could do the same only inasmuch as it didn't affect the water available to the first mine.

So you've got water rights that are primarily based on seniority and continuing to use your allotment so you don't lose it. That's not very well aligned with goals of conservation.