this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
118 points (99.2% liked)

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

7313 readers
355 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
118
Two Valuable Satellites Are in ‘Perfect Health.’ They May Be Scrapped. | The Trump administration wants to switch off and possibly destroy the climate-monitoring technology. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 1 week ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

or make some money by selling those satellites to say ESA. They might even be able to provide some jobs.

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Maintaining a satellite means expenses. If the funding is cut, the organisation and the people maintaining the satellites and the associated ground infrastructure won't get paid for it. Most of us aren't financially secure enough to do voluntary work as a day job.

Selling them to a different agency would mean that the buyer would also have to allocate resources to maintaining them. Not something that happens at any relevant timescales and it would be away from something else. And transferring the knowledge and skills would be a training operation in its own right.