😞

  • palal@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, anyone who was convinced otherwise was delusional. We’ve always known that methane has a substantially higher short-term impact on GHG emissions than carbon dioxide. We’ve also known for years now that natural gas is notorious for leaking obscene amounts of methane (even compared to coal mining per unit energy). That hasn’t stopped us from tapping and consuming more gas: in fact, total US fossil fuel electricity production has increased by 40% over the plateau in the 1970s-2000s.

    In the short-term, we are incredibly, incredibly fucked. Eventually, methane decays and whatnot, but that might be too little, too late.

    • Rhaedas@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      More methane release overwhelms the natural breakdown agents in the atmosphere (hydroxyl radicals) so an increase bumps up the decay half life average and overall greenhouse gas effectiveness. We know there’s more methane leaks now due to both manmade sources as well as natural feedback loops from warming. Yet the IPCC still uses the older half life numbers for methane even now.

  • bruhbeans@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    1 year ago

    COP28- we didn’t do shit the first 27 times, maybe this one will be different. Lol.

  • PinkPanther@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The world is fucked. Humanity will survive, but not without any hardship. We’ve already gone past the best age for humanity (or the western world, at least), which was the year 2000.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      We’ve already gone past the best age for humanity (or the western world, at least), which was the year 2000.

      I’ve got to admit, I really didn’t expect The Matrix to be quite that accurate.

      • interceder270@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think things started truly going downhill until shortly after smartphones became mainstream.

        Probably around the iPhone 4 era was when we past the point of no return. Just the next generation of greedy-shitbags out-greeding their shitty parents.

        • HubertManne@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          lol. it started going downhill by the 80’s. It was just real slow initially but that was our chance to double down and concentrate on doing everything with the effects on the environment being the top concern. 2000 and beyond is just where the fall got fast enough for regular folk to notice due to the acceleration. Which is still going so whatever changes you have seen in the last 10 years you should see that much in the before the next 10.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, we started going in the wrong direction when Reagan removed Carter’s solar panels from the White House.

    • TaterTurnipTulip@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t be so sure about humanity surviving. It all depends on how many tipping points we hit and how bad warming actually gets. There’s no way we stop at 3°. Existence for any humans will be incredibly fraught.

  • F_Haxhausen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “To get on track for the internationally agreed target of 1.5C, 22bn tonnes of CO2 must be cut from the currently projected total in 2030, the report said. That is 42% of global emissions and equivalent to the output of the world’s five worst polluters: China, US, India, Russia and Japan.”

    That last part will not happen.

    Zero hope left.

    The good news is that non-existence is paradise.

  • naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The world literally decided that it was better off with a big short-term bump in emissions than a smaller long-term one. That’s the primary motivator behind the switch from coal to natural gas, despite how much worse methane is as a GHG in the short-term (<100 year time frame).

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The world is on track for a “hellish” 3C of global heating, the UN has warned before the crucial Cop28 climate summit that begins next week in the United Arab Emirates.

    Scientists say far worse is to come if the heat continues to rise and the secretary general of the UN, António Guterres, has repeatedly said the world is heading for a “hellish” future.

    That is 42% of global emissions and equivalent to the output of the world’s five worst polluters today: China, US, India, Russia and Japan.

    Inger Andersen, the Unep executive director, said: “There is no person or economy left on the planet untouched by climate change, so we need to stop setting unwanted records on emissions, temperature and extreme weather.

    The UN warned earlier in November that the world’s fossil fuel producers are planning expansions that would blow the planet’s carbon budget twice over, which experts called “insanity”.

    The new Unep report said that if all the long-term pledges by countries to cut emissions to net zero by about 2050 were achieved, then the global temperature rise could be limited to 2C.


    The original article contains 500 words, the summary contains 185 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!