• Mojojojo1993English
    141·
    3 years ago

    Don’t think anybody is surprised. Has anyone actually tried anything? Nah didn’t think so.

    Here’s me not showering doing all my plastic reduction. Not driving not going on holz. Buying things from shops.

    One rich person negates ally efforts

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      81·
      3 years ago

      We’re actually doing enough that the acceleration has started to slow. There’s some indications that emissions are going to start dropping in the next few years, but we’re still decades from the point where concentrations stop rising.

      • cmbabul
        8·
        3 years ago

        Which is a few decades too late to avoid catastrophe

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
          51·
          3 years ago

          We might limit the damage enough to retain a civilization-supporting planet

          • cmbabul
            5·
            3 years ago

            I’m all for doing everything we can, but I think we may have to scale down what we mean by civilization at the point of acceleration we’re already at, we need to start prioritizing the things from this period that are useful and worth preserving. Because the way we currently live is coming to a close whether we like it or not unless someone invents some Star Trek shit

          • uphillbothways@kbin.social
            31·
            3 years ago

            That is the weakest, most watered down non-objective ever. I pity anyone forced to live on the planet we are currently leaving behind. It would be more merciful to potential future life to just give up, stop procreating and stop acting like we give a shit.
            The human race is a failure. Call the experiment concluded. We lost. And, we did it to ourselves. Pathetic.

            (Ideally, we’d just turn everything off now and quietly go extinct without doing further damage, to be honest. We know we’re going to fail, yet we continue to pull every other species in along with us. But, we’re not even decent enough to do that.)

  • HaiZhung@feddit.de
    3·
    3 years ago

    While I appreciate the sentiment, I think it’s unrealistic to expect the greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere to decrease. For that, we already would need net 0 emissions AND some sort of carbon capture system in place.

    For now, what must decrease is greenhouse gas emissions, and the article admits that that is what happened (but the decrease was so low it could be attributed to natural fluctuations).

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      1·
      3 years ago

      There are natural systems capturing carbon as well. The problem is that it takes 10,000 years or so to capture all humans have released to date. So zero emissions would already lower concentration over time.