this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
961 points (99.3% liked)

Climate

8395 readers
1221 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] foggianism@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Also, there would be less wars in the Middle East.

[–] julianwgs@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 4 hours ago

Please always provide a source.

[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

"We need the fossil fuels to get more fossil fuels to move the fossil fuels just to take the fossil-fuel thing to the fossil fuel store to get more fossil fuels!" -people that sell fossil fuels

[–] Vinylraupe@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

And one day we even become fossil fuel...

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 3 points 4 hours ago

At this point I'm starting to believe that we could replace all engines with hamster wheels with actual hamsters and it would be more efficient.

[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 8 points 6 hours ago

Look, you’re not thinking about the shareholders. I NEED YOU to think about the shareholders! How will they ever make their billions? You selfish bastard!

/s just in case.

[–] glibg@lemmy.ca 21 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

THR GODDAMN ENERGY FALLS FROM THE SKY FOR FREE!!!

[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, but you can’t resell it for a profit elsewhere easily. You want us to switch to sky energy, we need a way to make the output portable so someone can make money on it. I really hate capitalism and hope this is the fall at a global level. Though if anyone was watching, China has been making the right moves towards solar and transport. If they stop oppressing their people i’ll move all my soon to be worthless USD to YUAN.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 8 hours ago

Link to article?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 5 points 11 hours ago

now imagine how much we could save if we used sailboats

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 55 points 18 hours ago (9 children)

In the US, we use a lot of prime farmland to grow corn that we turn into ethanol - 30,000,000 acres. Thirty million acres!

That ethanol is combined with gas (making the gas less efficient, by the way) and powers our cars in the US.

If you look at the number of miles the ethanol powers in the US, and calculate how many acres of solar we'd need to power electric cars to go that number of miles, we'd need to convert less than a quarter of a million of those acres to solar. So let's round up from 214,000 acres to the 250,000 because... inefficiencies, or whatever.

So we could gain 29,750,000 acres of land to grow more food or whatever and stop growing corn to turn into ethanol just to burn it in our cars.

For that matter, if we wanted to use that ethanol land (JUST the land we're using for ethanol) to power ALL cars in the US, switching everyone over to electric, it would only take about two million acres. Sure, 2,000,000 acres is a lot, but that would still be freeing up TWENTY EIGHT MILLION ACRES of land we're using JUST to grow corn we turn into ethanol.

It does ignore anything like the chaos of forcing everyone to buy a new electric car, setting that infrastructure up - I'm not saying this would be easy, but it is stunning how much land we could stop abusing to grow corn to burn in our cars.

[–] PokerChips@programming.dev 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

If what you say is accurate, the other benefit would be that they wouldn't even need prime, fertile real estate.

They'd just need any space with good sun capture.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 1 points 2 hours ago

Theres a lot of misunderstanding going on here about both corn and solar power.

Corn is not something that requires ideal or fertile real estate. People imagine corn being grown in the stereotypical midwestern river-adjacent and particularly fertile type of places, like Iowa or Ohio or whatever. The reality is that modern corn production requires a shitload of artificial nitrogen fertilization, so the actual fertility of the land is virtually unimportant. Believe it or not, Texas is actually one of the most productive places for corn farming, and in particularly hot and arid areas where you wouldnt be farming much else. More like typical ranching land, not prime farming land.

Now with solar power, at the current levels of efficiency (and unlike corn), having a cloudy day is a major killer. UV intensity at high elevation can be virtually nothing when it gets a little cloudy. Whereas on a sunny say it would be extremely high. So you need ideally somewhere that is as high altitude as possible, but where it is also sunny almost all the time. There are not a lot of places that meet that description, and even the few places that do are largely very expensive to acquire land in because people want to build houses and hotels and golf courses and whatever else in (or adjacent to) the mountains. Take Pueblo, CO, for example. It’s one of the solar hubs of the US. But its difficult to expand from there because you can either go east, down in elevation, and increase the number of cloudy days. Or you can try to go west and everything becomes exponentially more expensive the closer you get to the Rockies.

More importantly though, corn and solar production necessitate two completely different environments. No one is growing corn in Pueblo, and you wont find many solar fields in places where corn is grown effectively. Because a lot of the time people grow corn where it rains often, therefore those places have many more cloudy days in a year

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Mandating solar PV in all building codes nationwide, and incentivizing onshoring of all of the processes that go into manufacturing solar PV panels (including using trade protectionism practices such as tariffs AFTER WE ALREADY HAVE PROCESSING AND MANUFACTURING CAPABILITIES IN THE USA) will do wonders for helping average people transition away from fossil fuel Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) cars to EVs.

Many people who cry foul about EVs and renewables adding too much load to a grid that is too old and just can't handle it forget the main counter to disarm their arguments: colocating generation with utilization.

Having solar PV (and other renewable) generation closest to where that power wants to be used is the best for the grid infrastructure (maybe not the grid investors) because it reduces residential/commercial load while maintaining the needs of the original giga users of the grid: Industry.

There are solutions to SO many of today's problems. We just have politicians that are bought and sold by billionaires and their corporations who won't do the public's bidding. Voting progressive politicians in, and preferably ones who vocally claim they're Democratic Socialist or similar, is the strongest way we push back against Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Tech, and all the other mega industries.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 119 points 23 hours ago (19 children)

...and that would drop the amount of marine fuel needed. Compound interest.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 30 points 20 hours ago (33 children)

If the post is even accurate, that likely doesn't factor in secondary needs. Roads, tires, shampoo, soap, lubricants, hydrogen, solvents, medical plastics. So many things made from oil and oil byproducts.

All of these industries have to be looking into alternatives in parallel, if they are even aware.

load more comments (33 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›