The target of keeping long-term global warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) is moving out of reach, climate experts say, with nations failing to set more ambitious goals.

  • Hellsadvocate@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it’s funny that you can’t really prep for this. It’s going to be a slow collapse, slowly churning and making it impossible for anyone to survive. As critical infrastructure fails, food, water sources dry up, and the only solution anyone is capable of giving: “Try biking to work”. Realistically it should be “get ready for an apocalypse.” No amount of prep will leave you untouched.

    • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s going to be a slow collapse

      I am not so sure about that.

      For the vast majority of humanities existence we have been one bad harvest away from famine.

      Many countries rely on food imports to feed their people.

      Failed harvests in two or three of the major food exporters at the same time grows more likely each year.

      One very hungry year around the world will cause chaos we have not seen since WW2.

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      the only solution anyone is capable of giving: “Try biking to work”

      I hate this so much, too. We keep seeing these pushes for individuals to reduce their carbon footprint, but it’s not the individuals who are responsible for climate change; it’s the corporations who continuously skirt emissions laws and lobby for looser regulations on their industries who are polluting the planet en masse. We could all bike to work for a year, and it wouldn’t even make a dent to offset the environmental damage caused by a single luxury cruise ship in that same span of time.

      • Sterile_Technique@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        This isn’t my area of expertise, but as I understand the present climate crisis, it’s actually misleading to say we’re “nearing the point of no return” as so many of these kinds of articles do.

        Every single day we pass a brand new point of no return because every day we keep pumping fuel into positive feedback loops that are already in motion. Not only will biking to work not do shit; but even if humans just went extinct right now and all industry/pollution/etc came to a 100% stop, the climate will still continue to (albeit more slowly) spiral into new extremes. What we’re feeling today is the ‘find out’ stage of climate inaction decades ago; and the damage we’re doing today won’t be be tangible for decades to come.

        Best case scenario is the coolest of an array of hellscapes - we’re in damage control mode. Rather, we should be in damage control mode; what we’re actually in is grind-away-at-our-9-to-5-while-we-watch-oligarchs-consume-our-planet mode.

      • blazera@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        actually the largest source of emissions in the US is personal vehicles. I have no idea where everyone got twisted around thinking their emissions amount to nothing.

        • John937@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I didn’t think this was true, but according to the EPA in 2021 it is

          Personal transport road vehicles are the largest category of transportation which is the largest source of greenhouse emissions, accounting for roughly 15% of total us emissions.

          The largest sources of transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions include passenger cars, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and light-duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans. These sources account for over half of the emissions from the transportation sector. The remaining greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector come from other modes of transportation, including commercial aircraft, ships, boats, and trains, as well as pipelines and lubricants.

          https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#transportation

          • John937@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is nuance!

            Heavy duty trucks is broad, and includes semi trucks, buses, tractors, etc

            I’d be curious to see those commercial vehicles broken out, and the question answered for how much impact personal transport has on us emissions

            Any vehicle exceeding 26,001 pounds is considered heavy-duty. Examples include city transit buses, mobile cranes, cement mixers, refuse trucks, and tractors designed to pull refrigerated trailers, dry vans and other equipment.

            https://fleetnetamerica.com/blog/post/classifying-medium-and-heavy-duty-trucks

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

            Read further down and it breaks down transportation emissions too. 58% from personal vehicles. Transport is the largest source of emissions, and personal vehicles are the largest source of transport emissions. Especially all our damn trucks.

        • Hellsadvocate@kbin.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean I don’t think it’s useless. I just think we all fucking know who the biggest polluters are. And how we still don’t have carbon caps is insane to me. Edit: fair enough check blazers comments

    • livus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s terrifying. I think one of the problems we face in getting people to demand change is that the collapse so terrifying and unthinkable that people don’t allow their minds to dwell on it for long.

    • Roundcat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why do you think the Saudis are pouring so much resources into these experimental line cities? Even they know that the system they helped create and benefited from is unsustainable, and building a self contained city in the middle of the desert is them testing the hypothesis of, can you build a habitable zone for humans in the worst case scenario of environments?

      It also ties into why there are so many billionaires who are obsessed in advancing space travel as quickly as possible. Even they are starting to get nervous about the Earth they have created and will have to live in.

  • Cal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nobody wants to listen.

    When it happens it’s basically overnight. Like stretching a rubberband that you pull and pull and think it’s fine. Then you pull just a little bit too hard and it snaps. It will be impossible to put it together again.

    We are no more than a few years, maybe a decade away from the hottest countries being completely unlivable. We are talking about 2+ Billion people that needs to move in a very short time. It’s coming and coming quickly. We’re not ready. Billions will die.

    “The planet will be fine, it’s us humans that are fucked.” /Slightly paraphrased George Carlin.

  • alternative_factor@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Damn I guess its over for real now. That really sucks, I haven’t really done much in my life and never really amounted to anything. So it goes, I guess.

  • Deref@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This type of reporting is super counterproductive imo. When people read “the planet’s fucked, no way to fix it now” a lot of them either give up and stop caring or become violent extremists. The right way is cautious optimism and busting myths - “here’s why public transport doesn’t suck” or “we need to build more solar panels” or “nuclear plants aren’t dangerous”.

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

      Additional it is super tiresome to read about “points of no return” every other day. My usual reaction to those headlines is “fine, get on with it”.

      And I do care, but doomsday narrative is effective first two or three times, and then nobody gives a shit. The problem is headlines like “buy local”, “stop buying single use items” or " reduce use of plastic" are not going to bring clicks and ad revenue.

      • Cryst@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. We’ve passed the point of no return like 10 times now. I guess we have another 100 before we really get there, if ever.

        • Hellsadvocate@kbin.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          People are already dying from the effects of climate change. If you think intense wildfires, record-breaking heat, failing power grids, uninsurable homes, and disasters disproportionately impacting poor nations are normal or sustainable, you’re mistaken. The climate crisis is here and worsening, whether or not you care about future generations. It’s a difference between civilizations collapse or a semi-livable planet.

  • bazsy@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’ve run out of time because change takes time

    I think this is misleading at best. Change needs money.

    Huge banks still investing in fossil fuel projects is shortsighted.