It's kinda cheeky for the countries like UAE and SA to demand reparations for countries not buying fossil anymore. Nobody's business is guaranteed forever and they should have diversified long ago. And bought less Lamborghinis.
this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
55 points (98.2% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5023 readers
369 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:
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.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yes. Its mere existence is progress, albeit painfully slow (recall the 100bn promised at COP15 was only reached last year). USA and some others were fundamentally opposed to the principle of any kind of reparation for loss and damage. Now the fund exists, it’s easier to negotiate higher contributions in return for some other action, step by step, without re-opening the big legal consensus process. Also, the higher the relative contributions to emissions, and the further we pass 1.5ºC, the more pressure to pay for the damage - this is a useful feedback.