this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
130 points (100.0% liked)

Climate

8654 readers
182 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
130
Trump’s attempt to crush clean energy progress not going to plan, experts say (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by grimpy@lemmy.myserv.one to c/climate@slrpnk.net
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Donald Trump has wielded the full might of his administration to crush the progress of clean energy, which he has called a “scam” and “stupid”. But there are signs this assault is not going to plan.

In March, the US generated more of its electricity from renewable sources such as solar and wind than it did via gas, the first time clean energy has surpassed the planet-heating fossil fuel for a full month nationally, according to data from the Ember thinktank.

While this was just one month, it follows a record 2025 for renewable energy. The pipeline of new power coming online in the US is overwhelmingly green this year, too, with 93% of all electricity capacity added in 2026 set to come from solar, wind and batteries. Just 7% will come from the fossil fuels that are dangerously overheating our world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We do use nuclear. Though at this point it's looking like wind/solar/battery is going to be cheaper, if it isn't already.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

more importantly to the people in charge of the spending, deploys and gets its returns faster. Nuclear you are looking a decade before it starts being operational and then another couple decades to recoup the cost. Solar can be up and running in months and recoup within a decade.

[–] sparkyshocks@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

Nuclear you are looking a decade before it starts being operational and then another couple decades to recoup the cost.

By the time a new nuclear plant breaks even on the capital expenditures to build it, a competing solar plant has already been built, operated for a few decades, and been torn down/decommissioned for even newer tech. That 80-year nuclear plant has to compete with like 3 successive generations of solar plants/batteries, advanced geothermal, and maybe even commercialized fusion. Building a new nuclear plant is a decision to saddle your grandchildren with a payment plan on locked in costs of construction today.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I heard of people covering the cost of solar within a year in some extreme cases during the last energy crisis.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

Depends on the accounting, if you count panels only the cost gets recouped extremely fast. Most of the cost is on the inverter and labour cost of installing them.