5 points

“ok… we broke yet another goal we set for ourselves. But we can still limit damage!!”

How many times does this have to repeat before we can’t limit the damage anymore

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Well, we can always limit the damage because the damage only goes up if we don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

So…uh…is everyone ready to join those of us slandered as “doomers” in reality now? Nothing of significance has been done or is being done, and this problem is not going away. It is only going to get worse. Unless everyone joins us in reality, it is over. I’m not exactly hopeful, as the “I hate all science” party just swept both houses, along with the presidency and they already had the courts.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

The EU had an 8% decline in emissions last year. That is roughly in line with meeting the 1.5C target and mainly done using reasonable policy.

China also invests a lot in Green technology. With the trade war, it is certainly possible that the Chinese economy crashes, which would mean lower energy consumption growth and hence lower Chinese emissions.

There also is a strong chance that Trump launches a massive war in the Middle East. He loves Israel and bombing Arabs. If that includes attacks on oil and gas infrastructure, that could be great for the climate(although horrible on so many other levels).

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Valid, though in some cases dark, points. The US is one of, if not the largest, per capita emitters on the planet, though. Our military alone is a top emitter. I just find the outlook for meaningful change in this country grim and the effects we’ve already begone to see from climate change are pretty severe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The unbelievably massive amounts of heat, pollution and environmental destruction from war is not currently ‘great for the climate’. Ww3 and bombing oil and gas infrastructures is not going to change that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points
spoiler

We won’t limit the damage.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

IPCC declared 1.5C wasn’t feasible a few years ago. I don’t recall the year, but it’s the same report when they said that the limit would be broken, but we’d find a way to pull it back down eventually with future tech. Or as some call it, “magic”.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

It’s just copium. “But we can still…” i.e. things that won’t happen anyway because they already did not happen before and are for sure going the reverse way under Trump. The few people who claim to care need to stop making themselves hopeful and happy with delusions, it’s not going to help. We’d need severe extreme measures now, things the general public would not want. That’s just the unfortunate truth of it, but one that people have to realize. Just like how people need to realize how many people want far right fascists like Trump, or the garbage parties in Europe. Things will get much worse now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s the same problem as “minimum wage” in the US; The goalpost moves further away as nothing is accomplished.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Sure, we can still limit the damage… if we “get rid” of Trump.

permalink
report
reply

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

!climate@slrpnk.net

Create post

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.

Community stats

  • 4.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.2K

    Posts

  • 29K

    Comments

Community moderators