738
submitted 1 year ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Thevenin@beehaw.org 56 points 1 year ago

I will say this about Biden: the dude's downright sneaky. It seems to be his administration's main strategy to publicly walk back a major agenda point, let right-wingers celebrate, and then after the media hype (and potential for right-wing backlash) dies out, quietly split it up into smaller programs that get pushed further than the original agenda ever could.

So yeah, it seems on-brand that the Biden administration would push for LNG exports after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and then go back later and curtail them instead.

[-] ericjmorey@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

Thank you for this comment

[-] BurningRiver@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

This should be pinned at the top of every thread mentioning Biden until the second week of November.

[-] ira@lemmy.ml 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A great start! We're going to need to see way more of this to reverse the massive increase of natural gas production since Feb 2021 (2.6 trillion cubic ft / month then vs 3.5 trillion now, a 34% increase in less than 3 years and an all-time high for the US)

[-] anarchy79@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Get over yourself, we'll have global war followed by a thousand years of anarchy before this fucking travesty is over.

[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago

Yes, but a lot of it goes to the EU and they lost Russias supply. Similar story with oil. There are massive OPEC+ cuts and the US fills the void.

[-] anarchy79@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

No wonder they all fucking hate him.

But I guess "both sides" are the same and represent the "status quo", right?

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

Yeah let's all continue to pretend that being better than the Republicans is good enough that is how we will see meaningful change

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 39 points 1 year ago

I don't expect the work of getting off fossil fuels to be completed in the term of any one President; it's a multi-decade project. He's been doing a lot more than 'better than the Republicans' though.

[-] lntl@lemmy.ml 34 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com 21 points 1 year ago

at least until after the election

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 45 points 1 year ago

Yes, yes, we know... All politicians are corrupt and bad, both sides are the same, don't vote, everything sucks, nothing matters, etc.

Or you could have just the tiniest bit of hope and diligence to improve the world...

[-] anarchy79@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

"It's not perfect, therefore it's useless, and because it is, I'm going to vote for the worse alternative. Don't make me explain my reasoning further."

[-] interolivary@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago

The idea that all politicians are corrupt and conniving bastards is mainly a right-wing fiction. They assume everybody acts exactly like they themselves do

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 10 points 1 year ago

That, and if you're not on their side, they want you to be screwed out of your vote and rights, or apathetic because you feel it is all hopeless.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

After the election it'll still be record level drilling, just like there is now.

The record will just be higher

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You say that like most Americans wouldn't support doing literally anything that would lower gas prices. The problem is trying to make everyone happy.

I mean, most people I know bring up gas prices before they bring up climate change, if at all. I try to remind these people that while the president/Congress can take actions to increase drilling there are many of us in the US that would prefer they didn't.

I usually then make it clear how obviously easy it is for me to say that as someone that works from home and isn't as impacted by gas prices; context is always important.

[-] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago

That's because it's electrion year lmao

[-] cloudless@feddit.uk 50 points 1 year ago

Isn't that the whole purpose of having elections? To make leaders do the right thing.

[-] 4am@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago

I mean I also understand the sentiment that the right thing should be done regardless, but if that’s what it takes then that’s what it takes

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 48 points 1 year ago
[-] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I am aware, but the reason we're seeing sensationalist articles right now is because it's election year, and the reason certain things were held off until now is because he wanted to look good during an election year

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

If it is effective I personally don't care what the motive is. Whether it's effective remains to be seen.

[-] Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

The argument may be that once the election is over these sorts of policies will get rolled back again, killing the effectiveness.

[-] eltimablo@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

Natural gas is produced as a byproduct of gasoline production. He hasn't done shit besides screw us out of access to a cleaner energy source we're already producing.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 83 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can re-inject it into the reservoir instead of burning it and dumping the resulting CO2 into the atmosphere. He's done a good thing here, especially light of the incredible death toll from the by-products of combustion.

[-] ares35@kbin.social 53 points 1 year ago

these are export terminals.. which are used by the industry to sell the product for more profit than they can get selling it domestically. it also eliminates the ocean-crossing trips made by those pollution-spouting tankers to deliver the product overseas.

[-] aew360@lemm.ee 41 points 1 year ago

This will drive down domestic energy prices as well. So naturally, Fox News cannot cover this

[-] sonori@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

Na, they’ll cover it twenty four seven as an example of the radical left driving up energy prices for hardworking americans, full well knowing that anyone who would do more then take everything they say at face value has long since left.

[-] aew360@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Shit, you’re right. I was thinking of 2014 Fox News, not 2024 Fox News

[-] squiblet@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago

Natural gas is commonly produced by fracking. And also, this is about export terminals.

[-] Jondar@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Natural gas comes out of the ground naturally, and isn't necessarily a by-product of gasoline refinement. I can't speak from experience on the refinery side of things, but I can speak from experience on the upstream production side of things. The natural gas we use for power generation, and heat at the facility I work at essentially comes straight out of the ground with minimal processing. Any excess is put back in the ground. That's specific to where I work. I imagine other places, the gas is separated out like we do and sent to "the market."

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Coreidan@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Hopefully the trend continues after re-election and this isn’t just a stunt to secure votes.

[-] doingless@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Why do I feel like every time politicians do the right thing, it's the home budgets of regular people who pay for it?

[-] ToastedPlanet 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Regular people are paying for it when a hurricane destroys their city. Think of switching to clean energy as an investment, if having a planet to live on doesn't do it for you. edit: typo

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is about blocking export terminals. Building them raises domestic prices. So it has a financial benefit for Americans who use gas for heat and has a climate benefit.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
738 points (100.0% liked)

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

6364 readers
661 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