this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
562 points (98.6% liked)

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

5447 readers
536 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
562
We've barely managed to make a tiny dent (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 week ago by FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/climate@slrpnk.net
144 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] killingspark@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

And it’s not even a sacrifice: If you dare to look at each of the animal industries production chains it’s plain evil from start to finish. It needs to be shut down fast. And it takes very little effort to change your diet. Quitting meat, going plant-based, is nothing more than a slight inconvenience.

I think this is not true. It is for you, because you see the animal industries as inherently evil. You have to acknowledge that for many people food is a big part of what defines their culture and for many cultures that includes meat. You don't have to like that fact, I certainly dont like it. And I agree that this has to change. But I don't think that any moral argument about cruelty against animals is going to bring that change.

I think it is fair for me to demand people change their habits and culture because the status quo is hurting me. I want to make clear what I mean with a thought experiment. Let's assume we bioengineered a cow that doesn't produce methan, and does photosynthesis so no food is required. The climate impact of mass-breeding this type of cow would be neglectable.

I wouldn't go out and tell people they should stop eating this type of cow. Not being a part of the cruel animal industry chain as a consumer is a choice anyone can make that doesn't affect anyone else and vice versa it's still true. You are hurting the cows and we should talk about that and make it public but I'd be in favor of people still being able to choose to eat that.

Mixing the altruistic arguments against animal abuse with climate protection doesn't help convince anyone to do this. The debate about becoming vegetarian/vegan for moral reasons is way older than the one because of climate change. The ones who where conviced by it already stopped eating animal products and the rest wont suddenly stop now because of those reasons. It might even be counterproductive, because it ties climate protection to an altruistic motivation where that isn't necessary. People can and should be interested in preventing climate change for very selfish reasons, which in my experience, is a way stronger motivator.