this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
36 points (95.0% liked)

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

5394 readers
206 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
36
Scientists advise EU to halt solar geoengineering (www.theverge.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by ptz@dubvee.org to c/climate@slrpnk.net
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

There’s ‘insufficient scientific evidence’ backing efforts to artificially cool down the planet, according to the European Commission’s scientific advisers.

Scientific advisers to the European Commission are calling for a moratorium across the EU on efforts to artificially cool Earth through solar geoengineering. That includes controversial technologies used to reflect sunlight back into space, primarily by sending reflective particles into the atmosphere or by brightening clouds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I did read that: sulfur dioxide.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-low-sulphur-shipping-rules-are-affecting-global-warming/

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the article (just thought it was worth sharing), but I do think any geoengineering efforts need to be done carefully (if at all). There's too many moving, interconnected parts we don't fully understand, and blocking the sun is just treating the symptoms. I'm mostly afraid measures like this, and carbon capture, are just going to be excuses to keep polluting and not treat the root cause.

That said, not doing anything will probably be worse, so I really don't know where I stand on the issue of geoengineering efforts.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

Ye, fixing issues rather than preventing them is not the best approach

[–] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

This is unlikely to be sufficient to explain the spike in global sea surface temperature in recent weeks, which is around 0.2C above the prior record for this time of year.

- the article

According to the article, the drop in SO2 emissions may explain 0.02-0.035 degrees of warming in 2023, and even when it has all phased out of the atmosphere it'll be 0.03-0.06 degrees of warming.

As the representative of the ethics committee that gave the advice that was summarised into the headline we're discussing was quoted as saying in the OOP article:

These technologies do show some promise, but they are far from mature. Research must continue, but the opinion of the European Group on Ethics shows research must be rigorous and ethical, and it must take full account of the possible range of direct and indirect effects. It is also important that the scientific evidence on risks and opportunities of solar radiation modification research and deployment is periodically assessed.