this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2026
76 points (98.7% liked)

Climate

8496 readers
675 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
 

Archived copies of the article:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

CA dems sure love their EVs. So much they keep shoving money at them even though research shows we could make a greater impact with e-bike subsidies. Meanwhile they've quietly and without explanation eliminated those so they can put more money into EVs.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

also...maybe try building public transportation?

if japan can have high-speed rail completely surrounded by faults and volcanoes why can't california have even just 1 high-speed rail line connecting the state?

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 months ago

I don't know somehow we're really bad at that and they always tell us it will cost 800 billion or something. I've a bit lost hope we can actually build things so focusing on micro mobility seems more viable but I would love better transit if they can get it done.

[–] br3d@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Indeed. And let's not forget that these budgets are all effectively handouts to the car industry (which created all the problems in the first place)

[–] severalkittens@ani.social 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We love our cars out here for some reason 😑

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago

It's fucking annoying. CA is a great place to live in a lot of ways but the car culture is so out of control it's unbelievable.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It's because California land is locked up by either entrenched farm families or corporations so building any new infrastructure means buying extremely overpriced land from people who don't want to sell it. Now you know why all budgets for CA rail explode: owners are jacking up the price of empty land to soak up as many billions as can be offered for the entire project. Farmers are greedy by nature and try to extract as much as they can from everything and everyone, including government budgets.

The only solution for now is to use existing infrastructure until the land can be sold for fair market value or imminent domain. And imminent domain would ruin a political career in the state with fuel for the right wing propaganda machine to smear nationwide.

[–] FreeLikeGNU@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Sure would be nice to convert a lane of each side of those 4 lane freeways to a railway? Seems like there is already lots of transportation allocated land right along major commute ways.