this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
63 points (93.2% liked)

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

5044 readers
428 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
silence7@slrpnk.net
63
Can $500 Million Save This Glacier? A bold engineering project might show a way to slow sea-level rise — and bring new imagination to the fight against climate change. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 8 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I sometimes wonder if we should improve the world. Not just damage limitation but actually increasing biodiversity.

Irrigate marginal lands for forests. Or building huge offshore underwater platforms where coral can grow. Either in-between island chains, near them or just out in the ocean.

There was some work done on Iron fertilization in the ocean that seemed interesting.

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Hubris. We have meddled with ecosystems with the intention of improvement for decades and have consistently made things worse.

We can't improve the planet, we can only undo the harm we have done and let nature do what it has done long before humans.

Marginal lands that haven't had their natural irrigation altered through human activity being made into forests through irrigation only destroys the ecology of marginal lands and has effects on surrounding areas. Even if humans altered the natural irrigation, restoring the natural irrigation just destroys the ecology that developed there and there are the problems that were solved with the irrigation alteration becoming problems again. We don't need more forests, we need less land development and pollution.

Building platforms for coral to grow not only pushes the coral reef biome into deeper waters, which disrupts the ecology of those deeper waters and pulls reef fauna away from natural reefs, harming them. Then there is the whole reason why the natural reefs are dying; ocean acidification and higher temperatures. So temps and acidity have to be fixed or the coral dies anyways no matter where you put them and at that point the efforts should be on repopulating the reefs instead of screwing up two biomes.

Iron fertilization of plankton to induce blooms? Why in Gaia's name would you think that is a sound idea? We are habitually as stupid as we are smart and think we can just keep screwing with shit and make things better.

Just release the grey goo.