this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

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

5022 readers
396 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
0
Shell Sees Demand Surging for Liquefied Natural Gas (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 7 months ago by einat2346@lemmy.today to c/climate@slrpnk.net
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Chup@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I must admit I stopped reading after the first paragraph but it's just so exaggerated or simply false, that I don't see the value in spending more time on such an article.

Shell, Europe’s largest energy company, forecast on Wednesday that global demand for liquefied natural gas, which has been a lifeline for Europe after Russia cut off pipeline gas supplies, will surge by around 50 percent over the next 15 years.

  • LNG is not a lifeline. A pipeline could be labelled like that, but LNG is a globally traded good supplied by dozens of countries.
  • Russia did not cut off natural gas supplies, they even supply now throughout their illegal war, towards countries that support Ukraine.
  • 50% increase over 15 years is not a 'surge', but more a slow and steady increase.
[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Russia did not cut off natural gas supplies, they even supply now throughout their illegal war, towards countries that support Ukraine.

Russia did cut off Poland, Bulgaria, Finland, Germany, Italy, France and Denmark. So the sentence is technically correct. They cut off gas supplies, just not to every European country.

[–] Chup@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

I read that paragraph on Wikipedia but fail to see your statements. Italy, Denmark, France aren't even mentioned there.

In detail it's described that Poland stopped paying Russia, so Russia stopped pumping gas via the Yamal pipeline to Poland. That is not 'cutting-off'. Also Poland kept receiving natural gas from Russia via Nord Stream, via Germany and over to Poland during summer 2022. Yamal was running in reverse and supplying Poland, so that they even hit over 100% storage at that time. For Finland it's similar - they stopped paying, so Russia stopped delivering.

Even today Russia supplies EU countries with natural gas, which is also part of the storage and supply calculation within the EU. What if Russia stops delivering tomorrow? How can these countries be supplied in such a scenario? Russia still has some leverage over a few countries, e.g. Austria via long-term contracts, where Austria stated not honouring the contracts from their side, would be more expensive that taking the natural gas.