this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2026
315 points (89.9% liked)

Climate

9075 readers
157 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 62 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Good news: with every passing day, it's becoming more and more obvious that capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and ecology.

Bad news: we're still about to pass environmental thresholds that will have irreversible consequences, and likely lead to an ecological catastrophe.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 25 points 1 week ago (12 children)

I mean you say "becoming increasingly clear" but it's been clear as day for about two centuries for socialists. Any progress happening now on that front is just retaking lost ground.

[–] deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think it became clear when the oil companies had their internal climate scientist prove it was them, and had that information leaked, and I believe that research was done 30 or 40 years ago?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Of course. I meant 'more and more obvious' for the general population.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] cerement@slrpnk.net 42 points 1 week ago
[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 week ago (22 children)

Neo-liberals get so upset when you mention that leftism actually begins at the desire to see capitalism and such businesses end. They still believe in a free market is self regulating when that's not the case at all, a free market will result in monopolies. Neo-liberals are left of Republicans but we're talking a small matter of degrees. Neo-liberal policies and economics are what got us into this mess, they won't get us out of it.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 20 points 1 week ago

Confronting capitalism means they might have to set aside their comforts for once, which they won’t do.

[–] eurodyne@piefed.world 18 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I find the kind of absolutism found in the headline, extremely unhelpful, not to mention total horse shit.

“Liberals” (and I’m not even getting into what people here defined as “liberals”) absolutely can confront capitalism in order to address environmental concerns, they just don’t like to and find it very difficult. But it is absolutely possible, and, with enough cajoling, absolutely will do so.

This “us versus them” attitude, and this level of absolute defeatism only makes the job much more difficult for everyone. Instead, I suggest we all focus on how to get the job done rather than focusing on all of the barriers in our way.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (18 children)

You don't want to get into definitions because it makes your entire point moot. Liberals are capitalism. Its the driving force of liberalism. They go hand in hand. The liberal revolutions were capitalist revolutions. This is an inescapable fact. The most core component of liberalism is private property, which is what capitalism is built on.

Liberals will never abandon capitalism because they are capitalism.

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago

Liberals Can't Address _______________ Because It Means Confronting Capitalism

You can put a LOT of stuff on that line

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's not actually confronting capitalism. It's about holding the responsible parties accountable while phasing out products that damage and/or change the ecosystem.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The responsible parties are the capitalists who profit off the status quo. So yeah, capitalism.

[–] bonesawmcl@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Reigning in socialized costs while appropriately taxing the practiced profits would be a good start.

[–] Gpennyhigh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

We can use whatever is proven to work better for healthy people and the climate and follow proven models. We can see how getting off fossil fuels is a good thing for human health. This is the only safe blue dot we have, yet so many think it's disposable and can't wait for some better life later in a magic realm. They trash the planet and don't support politicians that want to help, if they ever have enough majority. It's tribalism and dualism, two peas in a toxic pod, and won't change if the wealthy keep getting their way.

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The obstacle preventing liberals from addressing climate change is conservatives.

[–] nosuchanon@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Corporate funding of projects that change climates, to be be precise.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›