217
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net

The Saudi delegation has flatly opposed any language in a deal that would even mention fossil fuels — the oil, gas and coal that, when burned, create emissions that are dangerously heating the planet. Saudi negotiators have also objected to a provision, endorsed by at least 118 countries, aimed at tripling global renewable energy capacity by 2030.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] VubDapple@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago

"It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It" - Upton Sinclair

[-] solariplex@slrpnk.net 27 points 9 months ago

These are the people who kill us

[-] Nacktmull@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago

They are obviously the one country that must not be asked about this.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 9 months ago

There are a few other petrostates with the same issue too

[-] Nacktmull@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

True, they should of course also not be asked. Just phase out now!

[-] carl_dungeon@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

Who could have seen this coming!?!?

[-] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 8 points 9 months ago

Saudi Arabia has had an active delegation at every IPCC meeting over three decades - no excuse to be unaware, they always manage to scrape as close as possible to rejection from the process. By the way we misrepresent by saying "Saudi Arabia" - petro-dollars are only existential for an autocratic government (similar applies to gas-putin) - Arabian population would benefit from less climate change (their region will approach uninhabitable in summer - pity COP was not in July - note how they moved world-cup).

[-] xilliah@beehaw.org 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well they already live in a desert so what do they have to lose? And they're rich enough to be able to afford all kinds of tech.

[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 7 points 9 months ago

They already import 80% of their food and 40% of the water they consume is not replenishing. That is besides being in an already unstable region of the world, which would become largely uninhabitable with climate change going on further. So when oil either runs out or they can not sell it anymore, they are in a really bad spot.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

There's a guy where I live who's been working for over a decade with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Dubai, designing and implementing huge investments into renewables, especially solar. They are also investing huge sums into dessalination technology and solar furnaces.

They have some plan up their sleeves and I guess everyone will be taken off hand when it will be made public.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They have a big PR operation about their small solar investments. So far as I can tell, that's it, and not some kind of serious attempt to become a large-scale energy exporter based on renewables.

The Saudi plan is largely a sovereign wealth fund, intended to use the rest of the world as an income stream for the royal family after the oil is done.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz -2 points 9 months ago

The person is there working 6 to 8 months a year, a renewables engineer, seeing first hand a part of what is being planned for a near future but understanding the real scale goes way beyond what reaches their eyes and ears.

Unless a full behind the scenes information leak happens, I'm going to give credit to first hand knowledge.

[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 3 points 9 months ago
[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz -2 points 9 months ago

Let us poletely keep to our positions and live amiably with one another.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 9 months ago

Temperatures which go from unpleasant to deadly

[-] ThorCroix@slrpnk.net 6 points 9 months ago

Where is the news???

[-] Reality_Suit@lemmy.one 3 points 9 months ago

Careful or they'll try to teach you a lesson. 9/11

[-] fluckx@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Shocked pikachu

[-] atrielienz@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

This is their cash cow? Why wouldn't they try to block it?

[-] sour@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago
[-] atrielienz@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I don't think they care awfully much.

[-] sour@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago
[-] atrielienz@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago
[-] sour@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago
[-] atrielienz@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Their entire government is built on bad reasons. That's my point. I know it's not a good reason. That's a forgone conclusion. My comment was more "is anyone really surprised?".

this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
217 points (99.5% liked)

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

5041 readers
980 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS