-25

The ‘Climate Crisis’ Fades Out (archive.ph)

submitted 3 months ago by 31337@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@lemmy.world

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As the energy transition inches through the ‘issue attention’ cycle, a wiser approach should emerge.

top 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] morphballganon@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Uh, no, it's very much still a crisis, no matter how much covering your eyes, stamping your feet and yelling "no" you do.

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh look at that. The author, Steven E. Koonin, was employed by BP as their Chief Scientist. Then he was in the department of energy during Obama's administration.

I'm sure he doesn't have a vested interest in oil though.

The energy transition’s purported climate benefits are distant, vague and uncertain while the costs and disruption of rapid decarbonization are immediate and substantial.

Yeah... No conflict of interest here at all.

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Fades out? Really?! The daily sea surface temperatures have been setting records every single day for about 15 months and there's no hint it's going to stop soon or maybe ever. We are sitting at about .75 degrees Celsius above the 1982-2011 mean temperatures.

This is serious shit and it is NOT fading away.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

fades out? the world is cooking whatever fucking toolbag wrote this should have to go live in india or mexico, 50c+ and only getting warmer

this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024

-25 points (9.7% liked)

politics

18933 readers

2769 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News