268
submitted 1 year ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Miclux 14 points 1 year ago

They really argue about birds?! Not insects? Flowers? Plants? Bees?

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 19 points 1 year ago

It's a standard troll argument, yeah.

[-] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago

There are "grassroots" movements claiming significant environmental damage from converting farmland to solar farms. Seriously.

[-] federalreverse@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

Over here, there have been groups who put dead birds (often roadkill) underneath wind turbines.

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I think it's because they can see the birds that turbines kill. The birds killed the the pollution fossil fuels cause are hard to notice and especially hard to link to the cause of death. When there's dead birds around a turbine, it's more obvious.

People don't look at numbers. They're driven by emotions, which favour what they can easily see and wrap their heads around. Or alternatively, what they are most scared of. Eg, nuclear power is far safer and less radioactive than coal. But that doesn't matter. People are afraid of nuclear because of past incidents they heard about. The way coal kills people is so much harder to notice than a dramatic HBO series.

[-] green_square@yiffit.net 8 points 1 year ago

And infinity% more than nuclear!!

[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

Habitat loss due to uranium mining is certainly a thing. As is heating up of rivers for cooling the plant.

[-] Auzy@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have a private pilot licence and flew near Coal Plants here in Australia. You can smell the coal plant long before you can see the coal plant outside if you're flying at lower altitude (not sure about much higher, since I've only approached them probably at less than 3500ft)

It really gives some perspective just how unhealthy they are. People think you only smell them when you're near the smoke stack, but the smoke stretches a huge distance at higher altitude

[-] sinkingship@mander.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Skimmed the article for the reason of bird death.

They look at habitat loss due to fossil fuel mining and at the impact of acid rain caused by burning fossil fuels and mentioned climate change.

I have a feeling that these numbers could be shadowed when looking at the deaths caused by air pollution from coal plants. But I guess that must be difficult to assess.

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
268 points (98.9% liked)

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

5301 readers
418 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS