this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2026
345 points (99.1% liked)

World News

58629 readers
1936 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Action needed to avoid disastrous overshoot of climate targets, according to organisation’s environment body

The world needs to cut carbon emissions by nearly a fifth in the next four years, and by close to half within a decade, to avoid overshooting climate targets by a disastrous margin.

Although the “window has closed” on holding temperature rises to 1.5C, in line with scientific advice, limiting the “overshoot” of that target is still possible, according to the UN Environment Programme (Unep).

But countries are failing to translate their long-term targets on reducing emissions into short-term actions, a report on the “emissions gap” between climate goals and policies has found.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jinarched@lemmy.ca 6 points 16 hours ago

The only way we can cut emission this fast is with a guillotine.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago

Theres less than zero chance China or the US would do this.

[–] wheez@lemmy.zip 1 points 15 hours ago

Looks like plants should probably be back on the menu boys

[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago
[–] Radical_Socialist_t00t@lemmy.ca 4 points 22 hours ago

Nobody takes the UN seriously anymore anyway. Russia, Israel and the US have ruined its credibility

[–] DeadEndLink@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago

If only the pandemic had taken out 2 or 3 billion people...

[–] buzz86us@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

Buh the C02 Coalition (this is a real lobbying group BTW) told me everything was fine.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At the height of global lockdowns in early April 2020, daily global fossil CO₂ emissions fell by 17% to 19% compared to 2019 levels.

Main Contributors to the Drop:

  • Surface transport (cars and trucks): ~43% of the total reduction
  • Industry and power generation: ~43% combined
  • Aviation: ~10% to 12%
[–] Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Sooo... Wfh and we're good?

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 11 points 1 day ago

Fat chance of that. The Trump Regime doesn't give a shit about the future of the nation, let alone the world. So long as they have bunkers, our 'leaders' feel fine with dire outcomes.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nonsense. We just cut off 20% of the global supply of Petroleum with the Iran War.

That, plus Ukraine and Russia obliterating their fossil fuel production capacity is going a long way towards tightening emissions.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

The only problem is how unprepared we are for it and how it's not the 20% most pointless crap that will be left to rot. Many people would like to lose weight, but famine is a bad way to go about it.

[–] cannedtuna@lemmy.world 90 points 2 days ago (25 children)

Spoiler alert, we won’t…

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Not only that, we're actively working against it.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Best we can hope for is hyperscale data centres to create big brother and skynet.

[–] Mangoholic@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Skynets solution to global warming, kill all humans...

[–] Fafa@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean I'm not out to darken everyone's day. But this isn't happening.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 12 points 2 days ago

well of course. I mean if they had told us sooner maybe but how was anyone to know? /s

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

eh, we're looking at a grim future either way at this point.

Only way I can picture the world cutting by that amount, is if there's a massive collapse of western civilization / the wealthy get purged, and technology goes backwards. We won't do that willingly, so the world will instead continue its trajectory, with the worst of climate change impact hitting poor people -- and rich people / wealthy people using their assets to eek out a mediocre lifestyle in the future. I doubt we'd totally die off, barring something truly cataclysmic.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I doubt Rosa Luxemburg was referring to climate collapse when she talked about the choice between socialism or barbarism, but here we are.

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Maybe. I'm not so sure socialism would really change anything though, on the aggregate in terms of climate collapses.

Socialism isn't by default Eco-friendly / Eco-conscientious. Capitalism tends to have all the benefits from climate destroying stuff go to a capitalist class -- socialism could easily take the form of still pushing climate destroying stuff, but distributing the benefits to the masses. Depending on the scale of the change (which is likely to be massive), diversifying the benefits could result in no human surviving, rather than just a subset of the wealthy.

For a random example to explain the thought, really 'loose' example admittedly. Under socialism, theoretically you'd have a fairer distribution of wealth so that housing would be more equitable -- most people would get a simple starter-type home to live in. Rich person doomsday bunker type homes would be almost unheard of, as no individual would amass so much wealth that they could build em. In the socialist approach, each individual home has a smaller climate footprint, but the volume of homes built could have a similar net impact on the environment in the aggregate. So if it gets so bad that you need a bunker, humanity all dies together, equitably?

[–] Uranus_Hz@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Our best chance to meet that target is for earth to be hit by a major asteroid.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Boy, do I have bad news about how much carbon is going to be burned when a major asteroid hits.

We WILL get a mini-ice age from the blocking out of the sun though!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

an alien invasion would be better, but a meteorite impact is more realistic.

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Enough with these "by X years" projections, it keeps giving governments that there's still time to kick the can. Just publish "this is how much we are over the emissions budget TODAY" and make it clear that as long as it's above 0 that means we are truly, really fucking ourselves and future generations.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Best I can do is a 25% increase

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Line. Must. Go. Up! 💹

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 days ago (20 children)

Meanwhile the most sold car in north America is a huge pickup truck.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›