1433
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by inari@piefed.zip to c/climate@slrpnk.net
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ferroto@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Burn oil to pump oil

Burn oil to refine oil

Burn oil to ship oil

So we can burn oil at home.

[-] m3t00@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

cook oil to make plastic/chemicals

dump plastic/chemicals in the ocean

[-] Quexotic@infosec.pub 1 points 1 day ago

I read recently that they found bacteria in the ocean that's actually metabolizing some (PET) plastics, so that's kind of interesting. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/11/251104013023.htm

[-] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago

"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

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

It's the rocket ship problem.

You need fuel to move the fuel that moves the fuel that moves the rocket

[-] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Sure, but when a lot of the things don't need to carry the fuel with them and induction roadways do it all in the moment?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Not to mention all the fossil fuel used to build the ships in the first place.

There's a lot of fossil fuel burned before that steel arrives at the shipyard.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 166 points 3 days ago

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

which means we need to transport less fuel around, so less ships

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago

Not to mention that would drastically reduce dirty ocean water and countries can begin to clean up their coastlines.

[-] daychilde@lemmy.world 80 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days 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 (23 replies)
[-] glibg@lemmy.ca 43 points 3 days ago

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

[-] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de 76 points 3 days ago

🤫pssst,
this is one of the reasons fossil isn’t replaced as fast as it could and should be

[-] julianwgs@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 2 days ago

Please always provide a source.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 days ago

The actual statistic is from here I think.

[-] eyes@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Looks like a screenshot of www.marinetraffic.com - red ships are tankers.

[-] m3t00@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Internal Combustion Engine age.

[-] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 40 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 27 points 3 days ago

shampoo, soap

We could reduce shipping needed for these if it became the norm to ship them dry and mix with water in the home. Bonus: they could be shipped in paper rather than plastic, and consumed from reusable glass bottles rather than plastic.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 49 points 3 days ago

Or we could get rid of windmills and underfund solar incentives and research, occupy oil producing nations and try to drive this number higher? It's 2026 people, let's redefine what progress means! 🦅💪🎇

[-] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days 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.

[-] foggianism@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

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

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 days ago
[-] Rooster326@programming.dev 44 points 3 days ago

Inb4

Please think of the Poor Freight Captains and tHe eCoNoMy

tHe eCoNoMy

funnily enough renewable energy is probably gonna be the biggest driver of the economy in the next 10 years or so, considering that a lot of new infrastructure has to be built for it and they will generate a lot of power to drive further manufacturing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
1433 points (99.4% liked)

Climate

8414 readers
321 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