this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2026
78 points (97.6% liked)

Climate

8362 readers
484 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
78
High power bills impeding heat pumps, California’s electrification goals (calmatters.org)
submitted 2 days ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Electricity is one of those things that should be run by the municipality. Their incentive wouldn't be to maximize shareholder value, but to deliver a basic need reliably and at the lowest cost possible. At the very least, it needs to be run by a Public Benefit Corporation.

The minute you enter private enterprise into it, things go pear-shaped. A municipal power network wouldn't have problems with solar or distributed neighborhood grids. It just means lower cost for them, so they would encourage it.

They would need to get economies of scale, though. So you can't have it just be city-wide or county by county. It has to be statewide. That way you can spread out the risk and costs. It also means investing in rural wiring since it's no longer a matter of ROI.

Same for gas, clean water, sewage, and broadband. This isn't closet socialism. We currently do this for roads, freeways, state parks, postal service (sorta), and defense.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 days ago

Here in Sacramento our power is provided by an independent public body run by a democratically elected board. Generally it's very well-run and people here have virtually no complaints. We get energy with less fossil fuels for about half the price of PG&E. I have no idea why every community does not adopt this model.