48
So what you‘re saying is there‘s no chance to limit climate change?
We could do it.
That graph with all the lines taking all of a sudden a massive spike downwards, including China’s which right before D-day was climbing steadily upwards, looks like pure absurdist comedy, sure.
But we could do it. There’s still time.
There's simply too much baked into the climate's inertial change and the expected/already started feedbacks. We haven't change enough to show progress, and are already touching the limits in some methods of measurement. The IPCC gave up years ago and admitted we will shoot past 1.5 but would just use future tech that doesn't exist to pull it back down.
I know there's a drive to try and look at the positive, especially since anything but is called doomerism and even blamed for the inaction. I wonder how long we're going to keep fooling ourselves that we can fix this and even go backwards. We need to accept where we're going and plan for adaptation for a harsher world. Can't wait until we shift into "if we can just keep limits below 2.0" while not changing anything.
Well, we need to do both.
We need to act now, like the graph with a sudden unprecedented downturn, and also to prepare for things to get worse than we've ever seen them get.
I don't think we'll do those things. But we could. It's the current political and business leaders who aren't willing to. Think about how everything changed during Covid. A lot of people even at the current level of realization would be willing to make serious changes if it put us off the doom-course.
“There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen.”
Think about how everything changed during Covid.
A good example. Some things did change. In good and bad directions. A lot was handwaved around to get back to status quo as much as possible. It's exactly how resistant we are to change, and climate is no different. It's actually worse, since it's so much more subtle and long term than a disease that is hurting people around you, and yet people even denied that as much as possible.
I've seen a few graphs in my day, and they generally don't do that. Sure, it could happen, but it almost certainly won't. :(
That said, the US and China both making steady progress is very good, but then again, a Trump presidency certainly might see some of that reverse.
I think the big questions is: how do we get Russia and India to curb their emissions? If India follows China's per capita curve, but with a 20 year delay, it'll be disastrous. They're going to need significant help to continue industrializing without seeing a huge rise in emissions.
I don't think I'd have seen this coming even 5 years ago, but China really might be positioned to be a global climate leader.
Judging by those trends, it doesn't look likely, basically none of those lines are even starting to come down except somehow the US?
How hot is global nuclear Armageddon?
Hot, then possibly cold, problem solved, thanks to Trump!
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
48 points (94.4% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5316 readers
673 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS