this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
88 points (100.0% liked)

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

6382 readers
214 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
silence7@slrpnk.net
88
Electricity From Coal Is Pricey. Should Consumers Have to Pay? Environmental groups are making a new economic argument against coal, the heaviest polluting fossil fuel. Some regulators are listening. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 10 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This economic argument has been a key part of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign since around 2010.

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Some regulators are listening.

Doubt.

[–] spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago

FFS there are absolutely regulators that are pushing against coal, several being mentioned in the article specifically and including the EPA itself. Being skeptical is one thing, but just ignoring the entire article isn't remotely productive.

[–] mynachmadarch@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't doubt it. They might be laughing and ignoring what they're listening to as they count their next set of bribes, but their listening.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago

A lot of industries use electricity. They want cheaper prices.

[–] BubbleMonkey@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 months ago

Consumers shouldn’t have to pay because it disproportionately impacts people who live below the poverty line. Rich people and companies won’t care but people in poverty, with no means to move of affect change, get absolutely fucked.

Companies should be paying for it, because they are the ones that use the vast majority and profit from it. Normal people don’t profit from this shit.

Anything that negatively impacts the end consumer and not the company who dictates these things to the consumer..? Is wrong. End of.