Mola Yam posted:

Cuttlefush posted:

hey im gonna read this interesting piece on liberal british newspaper the guardian about how a developing nation with natural gas reserves emits as much as the UK. I wont bother checking if their sources actually support that, I'll just assume that's accurate. turkmenistan sure is stupid for not being as developed as western nations. im gonna post this in the climate thread. im informed.

loving moron

Cuttlefush posted:

yes that is how the private propaganda of western liberal democracies works. people don't go around sharing the many similar "excellent climate reporting" roasting western nations in this thread or elsewhere but the one about turkmenistan's primitive gas and oil fields matching the UK (statement, not really supported by the academic article they cited) output (for a short period). it's pretty loving obvious which articles get interest and stick with people and which articles get mentally shuffled away as "already know this".

also the guardian just straight up does not have excellent climate reporting. it has no excellent reporting at all. you have been tricked

silicone thrills posted:

For the doomer thread it certainly brings me great joy and laughter.


Local poo poo: miners lettuce is super delicious and healthy and a native plant to my area so about 2 years ago I went loving wild seeding the hell out of some areas I'd done ivy remediation in and now there's miners lettuce all over.

Also planted a bunch of red flower currents and salmon berry in the same area to help create a cohesive understory that can feed wildlife and just be cool.

It's not much in the grand scheme of things but it's a net good and brings me and others joy.

Cuttlefush posted:

yes that is how the private propaganda of western liberal democracies works. people don't go around sharing the many similar "excellent climate reporting" roasting western nations in this thread or elsewhere but the one about turkmenistan's primitive gas and oil fields matching the UK (statement, not really supported by the academic article they cited) output (for a short period). it's pretty loving obvious which articles get interest and stick with people and which articles get mentally shuffled away as "already know this".

also the guardian just straight up does not have excellent climate reporting. it has no excellent reporting at all. you have been tricked

Cuttlefush posted:

yes that is how the private propaganda of western liberal democracies works. people don't go around sharing the many similar "excellent climate reporting" roasting western nations in this thread or elsewhere but the one about turkmenistan's primitive gas and oil fields matching the UK (statement, not really supported by the academic article they cited) output (for a short period). it's pretty loving obvious which articles get interest and stick with people and which articles get mentally shuffled away as "already know this".

also the guardian just straight up does not have excellent climate reporting. it has no excellent reporting at all. you have been tricked

quote:

The data produced by Kayrros for the Guardian found that the western fossil fuel field in Turkmenistan, on the Caspian coast, leaked 2.6m tonnes of methane in 2022. The eastern field emitted 1.8m tonnes. Together, the two fields released emissions equivalent to 366m tonnes of CO2, more than the UK’s annual emissions, which are the 17th-biggest in the world.

Mr Hootington posted:

I see you have meet Thorn (an actual extreme right conservative who wants to genocide china) and slow news day (also wants to genocide china).

Kal posted:

No academic article was cited though?

Or do you mean to say that 4.4m tons methane/yr doesn't cause more heating than 366m tons co2/yr?

Gravid Topiary posted:

now this thread has de-radicalized me into making some rice in my $20 piece-of-poo poo rice-cooker, you have saved many lives this evening Wheeee namaste

Microplastics posted:

Huh so there is. Here's the link in case anyone wants to defend the thread:

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4031532&pagenumber=1&perpage=40

Cuttlefush posted:

oh I knew thorn, but i recognize slow news day now. lol

yes, this was
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.1c04873


"data produced by kayrros for the guardian" is where the 4.4m tons of methane per year comes from. kayrros is a private data analytics firm and you're supposed to just trust them on this one. the satellite kayrros uses, sentinel-1, cannot just spit out good estimates of methane emissions like that. you can fudge a number but it's not as easy or clear as they make it sound. if you look at the paper above you'll see they give 'up to' hourly rates because all of the methane plumes are transient and you just cannot get them all with sentinel-1 data, and what you do get needs to be ground truthed. if you go hunting for papers of scientists making estimates of emissions with sentinel-1 data you wont really find any because it's frought. Kayrros has been doing this for ages. they're a mostly bullshit generating tech company.

seriously read that paper and see how they quantify the amount of methane released per plume and the time variability. then go look at https://www.kayrros.com and their advertising pitch. one of them is legitimate. the other is a company making $$.

look at https://www.kayrros.com/industries-commodity-and-carbon-trading/. "Leverage the advantage of actionable information to trade commodities and carbon allowances at the right price and the right time". come on

BRJurgis posted:

Look sure we might be destroying the future of the planet for profit, but have you seen how upsetting the thread that covers the topic is? It's bumming me out! I don't want my forum associated with such unpleasant vibes. No, of course I dont read the thread.

Lol

Most people in the real world and in other internet spaces are happy to cope their way through any climate discussion, or outright deny the problem. It's awful gaslighting of those who care and try to inform themselves. This thread is absolutely healthy in that it's a place you won't only face the infuriating delusion so many willingly adopt.

ELTON JOHN posted:

i recently discovered cooking rice in the microwave. never going back

Radical 90s Wizard posted:

Why didn't you just say this in the first place instead of being a ranting rear end in a top hat?

Mola Yam posted:

Radical 90s Wizard posted:

Why didn't you just say this in the first place instead of being a ranting rear end in a top hat?

This is actually helpful for people like me, an idiot (but not an american)

F Stop Fitzgerald posted:

you should defend the threads honor in SAD. be sure to post just like that so everyone can see its a normal thread

r u ready to WALK posted:

What kind of idiot would want to shut down the worlds largest cringe capture project and let it all vent directly to atmosphere instead

Mola Yam posted:

F Stop Fitzgerald posted:

you should defend the threads honor in SAD. be sure to post just like that so everyone can see its a normal thread

F Stop Fitzgerald posted:

you should defend the threads honor in SAD. be sure to post just like that so everyone can see its a normal thread

biceps crimes posted:

my climate positivity of the day: there are birds in my back yard chirping, and it’s nice and cooler than normal. things aren’t that bad, yet

a strange fowl posted:

the mysterious little birds in the orchard always delight me. the ravens and magpies i can communicate with and kind of read their expressions, but the tiny songbirds just flit around on their own strange business. occasionally one will make eye contact with me and it's a special moment

Dystopia Barbarian posted:

I'm doing my part.

Microplastics posted:

Today while on the bus to work i saw a crow murder a pigeon.

I don't know what the pigeon did.

Mola Yam posted:

quote:

A report in 2021 from Oxfam found that by 2030 the global average emissions need to sit at just 2.3 tonnes of CO2 per year [per person] to keep global warming below 1.5C (the report didn't cover other greenhouse gases), down from 4.6 tonnes on average globally today.

[...]

Another report from the Hot and Cool Institute, a Berlin-based think tank, estimated that by 2040, per capita lifestyle emissions need to be 1.4 tonnes of CO2e and by 2050, just 0.7 tonnes CO2e.

quote:

[...] Such struggles highlight the systemic nature at the heart of the climate problem: it's very hard to live on little carbon if the products, society and infrastructure around you are all high-emitting. In fact, few argue people should be getting to these kinds of levels with individual action alone: much of the products, infrastructure, systems and political decisions which affect all our lives also need to change to reduce emissions.

While trying to live on two tonnes of carbon, Mainprize found herself confronted with several examples of this. She lacked power over the insulation in her home, which she rents, and there was no requirement for her landlord to install this. She was also reliant on a car for work and found buying an electric car too expensive.

quote:

"[We need] both individual and systems change," says Akenji: government policy, societal preferences and consumer behaviour can all influence each other.

quote:

In her efforts to live on one tonne of carbon in today's world, Readhead found herself seeking out what she calls "carbon freebies": carbon-free activities that she loved to do.

"You can meditate, be in nature, just stop doing things and absorb the world, smell flowers, go foraging, art, walking, cycling, gardening," she says. "Listening or playing acoustic music, singing, dancing, all the things we did as kids: these are things that we had a great love of."

She found that memories of a life before phones and computers started to come back to her. "Just sitting around with friends chatting," she says. "Just having a lark."

quote:

And did Mainprize and Readhead meet their respective goals? In the end, Mainprize accidentally lost the spreadsheet she was using to track her carbon around month seven (ed: lmao), but up until then thinks she was "just under the monthly average of the total where I should be".