this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
42 points (90.4% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5240 readers
446 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
42
We’ve been accidentally cooling the planet — and it’s about to stop | Humans’ fossil fuel burning has cooled the planet while warming it — presenting problems for the future. (wapo.st)
submitted 4 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Monstera@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Taking the sulfur thing as true, the solution ain't burn oil, it is get salty water up in the atmosphere. Simmilar effects, no sulfur

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I never said burn more oil?

Also I'm not a huge fan of the idea of seeding the atmosphere with salt water, that salt has to come down eventually.

[–] Monstera@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I was just continuing the conversation, I didn't mean you said we should burn oil. I see how that is a possible reading tho, my b

Yeah, salt has it's issues but I see it as the easiest and possibly least disruptive option. We'd "just" have to implement a fleet of autonomous sail boats with solar powered mist makers sucking ocean water and misting it up

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

It's all good. I can see that point, but it's unfortunately a bandaid (semi-short term cooling strategy) on a sucking wound (too much CO2 in the atmosphere), and if I trusted the world powers to continue solving the issue (Atmospheric Carbon Capture) before sepsis set (salting the earth from aeroslizing sea water) in, I'd be less opposed.

[–] ignirtoq@fedia.io 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not a huge fan of the idea of seeding the atmosphere with salt water, that salt has to come down eventually.

That's how clouds are naturally seeded anyway, with salt. Rain drops form (condense) around tiny airborne matter, like salt or pollution. Every rain drop is formed this way; drops can't actually condense without something to nucleate on. What they form around comes down with the drop. We wouldn't be trying to leave the salt up there. The purpose of the salt is to cause more drops to condense, i.e. more clouds to form.

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm concerned too much more salt may lead to salting of land, but I may be worried over nothing.

I also don't fully trust our ability to predict negative outcomes if it's profitable to ignore them.

[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

You would hope that it would be diluted by each raindrop that brings it back and its distribution over a wide area,, but hope isn't much to go on.