this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
902 points (98.2% liked)

Climate

8441 readers
261 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 41 points 6 days ago (14 children)

What do the lobbyists get out of the solar panels? How do the solar panels generate constant fees?

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 18 points 6 days ago (13 children)

How do the solar panels generate constant fees?

You see, people need to pay for electricity. Generally speaking, they don't get it for free. Thus the owner of the solar panels makes money.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Right. There's not as much money in renewables, so there's less lobbying.

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 10 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I mean... Isn't there though? You do a one time investment, and then you earn money for 20 years with negligible operating costs.

Shouldn't every capitalist get a priapism from this idea?

[–] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 6 points 5 days ago

Capitalism is about hierarchy more than it is about profit. Capitalists spent billions to put someone who bankrupted a casino in charge of largest economy in the world to stop the woke left. Capitalists pay for golden parachutes for nepo baby CEOs who shit the company bed. Capitalists sack departments with mission-critical institutional knowledge because that institutional knowledge gives the workers power.

In an ideal free market, the company that ends up with the largest market share is not the company that optimized for profit, but the company that optimized for murdering all the other companies so it's the largest by default. In real life, the rich and powerful let this mechanism roam free when it helps them oppress the working class, while regulating the market when it makes the game unfun for the rich, and while insulating each other from the consequences that were not guarded against by regulation.

I think the main problem is a lot of them are already entrenched in the fossil fuel market and most of the people holding the money aren't the entrepreneurial types because all the wealth is inherited so they'd rather just hold onto their existing property and fight to keep it relevant than start again somewhere else. It's dumb though because yeah it's free money printing. Am I assessing this right?

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)