4 ms·
That can't be a universal increase, can it? I've been worried about smog, didn't think to track carbon penetration over the last few decades...
by Andrex 2y ago
That can't be a universal increase, can it?
I've been worried about smog, didn't think to track carbon penetration over the last few decades...
- silverquiet 2y agoThe world over; humanity has put more carbon into the air by weight than the total sum of all that we've built on the surface, and it's still accelerating. It's a rather awesome testament to humanity, but not exactly in the positive sense given that the externalities are beginning to bite.
- exe34 2y ago[flagged]
- FredPret 2y agoThis is hardly accurate. It's the global poor who are most impacted by a (hypothetical) slowing economy. Sure, some billionaire won't get that third yacht. But it's the several hundred million women in Africa doing their family's laundry by hand who suffer much more, by far. What we need is oodles of economic growth, in as green a way as possible. AKA, solar, batteries, nuclear, and so on. And what that means is more and better tech, more and better deployment of capital.
- jtbayly 2y agoSome people wouldn’t have been able to afford food, you mean.
- exe34 2y agowe have people choosing between heating and food, today, in Britain. we have children going without food today, in Britain. we also have the greatest economic equality in a very long time.
- FredPret 2y agoCheck out the wonderful earth.nullschool.net. Here's a link to global CO2 levels [0]. As I understand it, it's live data from satellites. You can see it's lower (redder) where forests and plankton are growing, and higher (whiter) elsewhere. You'll also notice that it's pretty much the same everywhere - the range is only 400 - 450 ppm. [0] https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/chem/surface/level/overlay=co2sc/orthographic https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/chem/surface/level/ove...