That's a lot of words to say nothing.It reads like it's written by big cement money since almost all arguments it brings up apply to concrete and steel as well, and that it comes to no conclusions just strengthen that feeling as it creates FUD without anything that could backfire.
Of course it could also be based on actual research with real concerns about greenwashing that just communicates really poorly. But in any case there is nothing to be gained from this article.
I had hoped it would contain some data about origin, if local species are getting replaced, or anything else possibly interesting.
Last year was also good for a lot of new climate legislation on EU level. The big once were a sales ban of fossil fuel cars by 2035 and a second emissions trading scheme for transport and heating. Also the current emissions trading scheme has had certificates removed in the coming years.
Lets see how it will continue to go, but as it stands the EU is 1t above global per capita CO2 emissions. That is going to create some interesting dynamics in climate policy, with the EU gaining a bit more credibility.
Ya, a big chuck of Dems have, but not a majority in either chamber of congress by a long shot, and even thouse still who have signed are only being pressured into refusing donations, not doing things like not relying on oil lobbyist and their former oil executives advice to keep gas prices low and manage the energy transition.
Hence why we’re still building new natural gas plants as a “bridge” technology even though we could instead be using cheaper energy sources that don’t produce massive quantities of carbon by operating.
This is really positive news especially as most the efficiency savings come from things that are only at the start of their roll-out, a lot of the infrastructure development for solar and wind is already in place with construction already in progress for huge amounts of generation. It likely also that the lower demand for electricity comes in part due to more efficient devices gaining market share; better water heaters, heat-pumps, LED lighting, etc combined with better insulation and more focus on efficiency - plus of course home solar or similar, an increasing amount of people are at least partly off-grid and use home generated power which reduces demand on the power grid.
We also have some really useful new tech starting to reach market like tidal generation, tandem solar cells, Perovskite (which we've been hearing about for ages but they're actually starting to build factories), e-fuels (again long heralded but actually starting to move into commercial production), and various new electric planes, boats, charging technologies, energy storage mediums, and etc all of which will help increase the rate of adoption and help decrease carbon emissions.
It's 2024 and we still think this is something that's up for debate?
There's thousands and thousands of papers full of easily verifiably data that proves climate change is real, that we're responsible, and that it's getting worse.
Haven't read the article, I'm gonna guess it's pressure from corporations losing profits.
Edit: yup.
Meanwhile, BC United has committed to scrap the CleanBC plan, saying it “will kill jobs, kill paycheques, kill billions in funding for vital public services and plunge our province into a recession.”
Aaand that's how they're gonna get the reactionaries to do their dirty work for them on social media. People will gladly blame a climate policy that will give their kids a better planet before they blame the corporation who cuts their wages and offloads their shrinking profits directly onto the workers.
fun fact we've not had a single year in which we've lowered our emissions from the previous year since the climate crisis began. (excluding covid lockdown years which wasn't our choice)
that's true, but unfortunately we all share the same planet, so unless we see a world wide mega steep downward trend (by yesterday) i stand by my 100% fucked statement.
It's more a matter of degree than either fucked or not fucked. We're not at the point where we completely avoid damage, but there is still coal, oil, and gas in the ground, there are forests yet standing. We have an opportunity to limit the damage quite significantly.
“Global warming could challenge the very fabric of the world’s ecological and economic systems,” warned Shell executive Ged Davis in one newly uncovered document from 1989.
Most scientists will agree that even stopping emissions isn't enough now. We need to capture and sink money in removing it. GHG effect will work with or without our emissions at this point.
Earth is perfectly habitable with 10 degrees warming. The problem is that the jump in temperatures is way to fast. So biomes can not shift quickly enough, which causes huge problems. So right now the most important thing to do is to limit that jump. If we do not go too much higher, then most areas humans currently live in will still be habitable.
That much warming will also significantly shrink the part of the planet within the human climate niche. Even if it happened a bit more slowly, we'd end up with a lot fewer people as a result
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
Active