this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
147 points (98.0% liked)

Climate

8606 readers
1177 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] parson0@startrek.website 3 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Oh no, I didn't realise you pay more for energy now. Of course then let's build more nuclear power plants because they're famously cheap to build, operate and maintain. You sound like all my favorite Germans suddenly outraged by war(crimes) because gas prices went up.

Electricity prices regularly go into the negative on windy/sunny days. It's not me ripping you off with your energy bill. So instead of repeating populist rhetoric, I suggest you start yelling at your own government. We need to stop importing overpriced LNG and oil and continue to focus on renewables (for Sweden probably geothermal and hydro). Don't worry, I'll be doing the same here. Europe can figure this out together if we only start yelling at the right people.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 0 points 39 minutes ago (1 children)

they're famously cheap to build, operate and maintain

Germans are an interesting breed. They see countries with way cheaper electricity production costs than them, and think, "yeah, nuclear must be more expensive".

if we only start yelling at the right people.

That's what we're doing. Like it or not, there cannot be a strong EU as long as Germans keep electing people like Merz. Tired of the Deutschland Hass? Get these nukes out of Ramstein

[–] parson0@startrek.website 1 points 19 minutes ago

You're yelling at me, I don't represent the German government nor did I ever vote for anyone involved. Quite the contrary. I don't like nuclear for reasons already outlined, you can look up the number yourself to disprove your feelings.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Sweden already net exports 19.4% of what we produce. Hydro is not free of problems, it famously destroys the travelways of eels and other water creatures. Replacing the capacity of one nuclear plant with wind parks fucks up bird life, and allegedly the turbine blades are hard to recycle. More solar would be welcome but doesn't help shit on those winter nights when we need the electricity the most.

One of the underwater cables from Scania to northern Germany broke for a few days, suddenly our electricity was affordable again. Weird how that works.