this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
19 points (100.0% liked)

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

6226 readers
314 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]
19
Why Does Geothermal's Messaging Sound Like Fossil Fuel & Nuclear's? - CleanTechnica (cleantechnica.com)
submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah the article seems to be "Nuclear and fossil fuels are reliable and list that as an advantage, geothermal is also reliable and lists that as an advantage", to which: yeah? That is the case. The problem with fossil fuels is that they are an exceptionally good energy source, apart from the fact that they are slowly choking the planet. If they werent so good at providing energy they would be a lot easier to replace.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The article goes a little further than that. The problem is not just nuclear, fossil, and geothermal listing reliability as an advantage.

If the article is to be believed, reliable power production is not a significant benefit anymore, given the extent of storage options to store the energy from intermittent wind and solar.

So the problem is, the geothermal industry is attacking wind and solar energy, using a talking point that is no longer valid - just like the fossil fuel industry is doing.

And attacks on wind and solar based on false premises are bad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

If the article is to be believed

Aye, there's the rub. Contending that reliability of electricity generation isnt an important fact is wishful thinking at best (and boosterism of something you're invested in at worst). There is nowhere bigger than an isolated town or so that manages a grid without either reliable generation or power exchanges with another location that does have reliable generation.