... "more bad is good for business" ...
:'(
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.
... "more bad is good for business" ...
:'(
Yet the US military is one of the single largest polluters on the planet. Yes they spearhead a lot of climate research, but then there are departments that will throw away $100m like I throw away a nickel. The amount of greenhouse gases produced by them in a single year is more than you or I or anyone you see or know will produce in a whole lifetime combined.
Climate change can also contribute to instability and conflict when water and food shortages trigger increasing competition for resources, internal and cross-border tensions, or mass migrations.
Well summarized. The question is does the civilian/political leadership like having these problems, in that it is an opportunity for more wars, and leveraging the political division over immigration?
While damage to military bases/ports matters, damage to everyone else, should matter more.