this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2024
78 points (94.3% liked)

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

5397 readers
113 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
 

This post uses a gift link which may have a view count limit. If it runs out, there is an archived copy available

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zante@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not sure if you’re trying to be funny, but select Omfif fairly randomly and because the used Chinas own data.

I simply point out there are number and conflicting reports about what’s going on with that Chinese economy.

Indeed, the FT who now write about this EV miracle, have previously written at length about issues, and government stimulus thereof

https://www.ft.com/content/bae8f56b-d2f2-489f-b0cb-8ccc384c40d2

https://www.ft.com/content/ff4243bb-1367-4348-9350-d848418c4418

if you’re unable to parse different and sometime conflicting sources and be interested in what’s happening within china’s economy, and instead are reliant on YouTube slop and gimmicks, maybe you’d be more at home on twitter or something like that ?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

if you’re unable to parse different and sometime conflicting sources and be interested in what’s happening within china’s economy, and instead are reliant on YouTube slop and gimmicks, maybe you’d be more at home on twitter or something like that ?

Simply flipping through a stack of newspapers and searching for meaning, without consulting the raw metrics of the countries you are analyzing, is worth about as much as reading the tea leaves at the bottom of your cup. To wit:

the FT who now write about this EV miracle, have previously written at length about issues, and government stimulus thereof

Neoliberal publication of record predicts bad things will come from state actors stimulating/regulating their economy is a record I've been hearing played since the 1960s. If you took these predictions at face value, the Chinese economy shouldn't have running water much less cutting edge chip fabrication and a nascent airline industry.

At some point, you're forced to question the ideology behind the publishers, rather than just nodding along at the Business Oracles while they read from a pile of chicken entrails.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Western economists are historically bad at predicting Asian markets.

The media reporting on China mirrors the same bad predictions as when Japan was emerging as the number two economy during their own economic miracle.