There is and has not ever been an answer other than refusing the scale of global economic activity.
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
61 points (100.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
7515 readers
195 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
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
Carbon capture is a boondoggle.
More of a grift.
Y'all, they're never going to adopt a solution that works. Climate change mitigation is an existential threat to capitalism because it would force the recognition of any imperative other than profit and infinite growth; it is infact antithetical to them.
Capitalism evolved out of feudalism in large part due to the availability of fossil fuels. The claim is that capitalism is necessary to manage scarcity, in fact capitalism evolved in the greatest period of wealth humankind will likely ever know. Fossil fuels power capitalism. It is the system that evolved to turn fossil fuels into wealth for the richest.
We could have a currency backed by carbon emissions, which we could use to ration fossil fuel use, but, well, we won't.
Sounds like... for the sake of the world we need to remove the existential threat of capitalism in the first place. Cut out the tumor completely.
CCS is just a shiny distraction from the real solution of moving away from fossil capitalism. That's why Exxon and others are so keen on pushing for it.
ugh. the article talks about it as an economic issue which annoys me. I have not encountered anything that in practice is proven to actually sequesters more carbon than it creates. I mean im fine with small scale poc type experimentation but if something is going to be scaled up they need to really look at if it can sequester more than it produces at each level of scale and be sure in a six sigma kind of way.