this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
107 points (100.0% liked)

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

6913 readers
494 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
[email protected]
107
Six months into con­gestion pricing, more cars are off the road, report says (ny1.com)
submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

The only thing that bothers me is that it is a regressive tax on the poor. Rich people won't blink at the fee so it only stops poor from driving.

I'd like to think that the money will go to public transportation but history has shown that because money is fungible, the income from the fees will only mean they cut previous infrastructure spending.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yes, and often the core area is not affordable on retail, services, or even trade salary so they have to commute in, and the hours may dictate that they can’t take transit; even some large cities have a service pause overnight.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

This is another misconception addressed in the Climate Town video on this subject, with more details if you are interested:

New York Declares War On Traffic (A Congestion Pricing Story)
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=DEFBn0r53uQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEFBn0r53uQ

They might need to commute in, but they don't have to drive in. The vast majority of people going to Manhattan doesn't drive, they take the subway, buses, trains and bikes. Only 20% of the people traveling through the congestion zone is in a vehicle and only 2% of the poor drove in.

Workers that needed to drive in wasted a lot of their valuable hours stuck in gridlock traffic, burning their own costly gasoline and being prevented from reaching their job site, costing them more than congestion pricing

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

I gotta watch that, thanks!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 days ago

That’s why I said “often” and “some cities”. It’s not universal. I support congestion pricing.

load more comments (4 replies)