Lemmings.world
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 1 year ago

US Opts Out of Dutch Plan to End Fossil Fuel Subsidies at COP28

finance.yahoo.com

external-link
message-square
12
link
fedilink
124
external-link

US Opts Out of Dutch Plan to End Fossil Fuel Subsidies at COP28

finance.yahoo.com

silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 1 year ago
message-square
12
link
fedilink
(Bloomberg) -- COP28 Daily Reports: Sign up for the Green Daily newsletter for comprehensive coverage of the climate summit right in your inbox.Most Read from BloombergApps That Use AI to Undress Women in Photos Soaring in UseThe Record Rush to Buy a Rolex or a Patek Philippe Is OverPenn Leaders Out After Botched Genocide Answer, Alumni PressureApple’s iPhone and Watch Product Design Chief to Leave in Shake-UpStock Faithful Ride $7 Trillion Rally as Market Timing BackfiresThe US opted out of a D
  • lntl@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    the US military runs on fossil fuel, can’t disempower the military

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The bulk of their operations are logistics, which can be decarbonized. And military use isn’t generally subsidized in the usual sense of that word.

      • Sonori@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even the parts that still need fuel can use synthetic or bio, if there was ever an industry where costs don’t matter it’s the military. Besides, given how much dealing with fuel limit’s operations, any reductions in front end fuel use come with a directly proportional increase in capability.

      • lntl@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        military still has to buy it. i mean the infrastructure to produce oil has to be there and in good working order. subsidized by the public as required.

        military will only decarbonize if it’s a strategic advantage that they understand. i haven’t heard any talk of them doing that except in out in the outer rim where it’s difficult to ship fuel.

    • vivadanang@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know the US military is one of the largest consumers of fossil fuels, but they see the times changing and are trying to adapt:

      https://www.defensenews.com/smr/energy-and-environment/2023/10/09/us-army-ready-to-pursue-electric-light-recon-vehicle/

      https://mwi.westpoint.edu/the-lethality-case-for-electric-military-vehicles/

      https://www.gmdefensellc.com/site/us/en/gm-defense/home/integrated-vehicles/e-isv.html

      https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2023/2/28/army-currently-focused-on-hybrid-rather-than-all-electric-vehicles-official-says

      https://www.wusf.org/transportation/2023-04-15/the-military-is-converting-to-electric-vehicles-on-bases-but-charging-them-remains-a-challenge

      https://www.cbtnews.com/u-s-army-receives-first-order-of-electric-pickups-from-ford/

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.net

climate@slrpnk.net

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !climate@slrpnk.net

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.

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 485 users / day
  • 1.74K users / week
  • 3.85K users / month
  • 9.91K users / 6 months
  • 45 local subscribers
  • 6.52K subscribers
  • 8.24K Posts
  • 36K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • silence7@slrpnk.net
  • BE: 0.19.11
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org