this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
295 points (98.4% liked)

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

5022 readers
389 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] andymouse@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Actually there is a serious risk that Earth turns into Venus. Perpetually self-reinforcing green house effect. All life on Earth, fried, for all eternity.

Edit: Well, until the sun blows.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Actually there is a serious risk that Earth turns into Venus.

I'm sorry, but no. There's not. Not only is there not a serious risk, there's not even a slight chance. Even if we burned every drop of oil and bit of coal and released all the methane deposits, the earth still wouldn't even be close to reaching the conditions required for runaway greenhouse effect. Not for about 2 billion years, when it's estimated the sun's output will have increased sufficiently to vaporize much of our oceans.

I get that climate change is serious - my graduate thesis centered around it and carbon cycling - but please don't spread bullshit. We have enough issues to deal with already without making up more. Please fact check yourself and others.

Relevant articles you should read:

Scoping of the IPCC 5th Assessment Report Cross Cutting Issues

Low simulated radiation limit for runaway greenhouse climates

The Runaway Greenhouse: implications for future climate change, geoengineering and planetary atmospheres

Can Increased Atmospheric CO2 Levels Trigger a Runaway Greenhouse?

[–] andymouse@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thank you. Wow. I was basing that on something I saw or thought I saw in Cosmos (the 1980s version with Carl Sagan). Perhaps I was stoned when watching it. There is little better than to watch one of the Cosmos series while stoned - or the autotuned versions by Melodysheep (on YouTube).

For anyone who wants a quicker read on the above: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect

I shall have to revise my world view now. 🤯🤯🤯 Wow. I feel optimistic.

Tardigrades - they will likely survive then. And cockroaches, and other life. So even if we all + most animals die out, we will be like the dinosaurs, and life may indeed bounce back.

I mean... A shadow has been lifted from my soul.

Goddamn. I know it seems like I am joking but I am not.

Good news.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

No worries! I get corrected on things all the time. Thanks for taking it constructively instead of saying choice things about my mother.

Want even better news? The earth totally isn't fucked! Humans might be, but life on earth will probably be alright.

Edit: I got in trouble with crazies when I said "fine" before, so let me elaborate - I mean life will likely survive and in sufficient variety to have no issue rebounding.

The last big extinction event we had was the Permian-Triassic Extinction Event. Almost 90% of species died out. We're not quite sure what caused it (probably volcanoes), but CO2 levels were nearly 6x higher than now, the oceans were sulfurous, acidic, and oxygen starved, and global warming was leagues beyond where we're at now. Life bounced back and we're not even close in severity.

So should we keep fighting climate change? Hell yeah! But it's not as dismal as it seems.

[–] Fleur__@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I don't believe you

[–] spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Isn't the carbon were releasing now from fossil fuels carbon that used to be in the atmosphere? What self reinforcing mechanisms will allow for temperatures roughly beyond what has already occurred, which still sustained life?

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Briefly, they're wrong. I responded in detail above.

You are correct, what we're burning as fossil fuels is largely the remains of millions of years of vegetative and microbial life, altered due to heat, pressure, and time. Millions of years of time.

All that carbon making up those organisms was fixed from the atmosphere. While biological functions have been busy fixing CO2, volcanoes, the Earth's mantle, and even some geochemical processes release CO2. If not for biological fixation, the atmosphere's CO2 content would be higher.