this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
170 points (91.7% liked)

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

5394 readers
385 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
170
๐Ÿ™„ (lemmynsfw.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] bbuez 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Idk? Do the math? 1/4 the average Americans yearly carbon emissions, divided by? 1 hour? Thats like 1 American traveling and eating and driving and shopping over a whole years worth of time in 4 hours...

[โ€“] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Not saying I agree with the person you're responding to, but I think you're misinterpreting their point. They're not trying to do a comparison between yearly emissions of T Swift and the average American, but attempting to demonstrate that there may be justifications for the amount of emissions.

Their comment seems to be suggesting that with the extreme demand to see this artist, her job requires she travel much farther than the average American. You could put some of the blame on her directly, but equally, we can factor in how many people are contributing to the extreme demand to see her. If you were in her shoes, could you resist the desire to perform and please your fans (and get paid for doing so).

Again, not trying to support a horse in this race, just to explain the point in more equitable terms.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Exactly my point. It's not just her, it's her and like 5 zillion people who are going to show up to watch.

[โ€“] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago

can't she take the train, and be just 5 hours late instead ? without sacrificing her job of course. but no ..

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

Sure. Now consider the math of how many people are in the audience of one of her shows. Assume they each drive 50 miles round trip, and add that to her plane trip.

Ok now presume that she's super responsible and doesn't fly, and 1 in 4 people from all the shows she does in a year fly to HER instead for her to have 12 or 24 concerts a year (conservatively).

Comparing her to an average American for travel is pants on head stupid.