this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
119 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39110 readers
2395 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


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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/4810640

Archived copies of the article: archive.today ghostarchive.org

Annotated text, via Richard Delevan

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] geogle@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

I know you want it to be stated outright, which is unlikely to happen. However, section e does state pretty directly:

(e) Reducing both consumption and production of fossil fuels, in a just, orderly and equitable manner so as to achieve net zero by, before, or around 2050 in keeping with the science;

Yes, you can pick on 'the science' and what 'net zero' means, but unequivocally phasing out all fossil fuels in 27 years is not achievable unless we found ways to completely replace our current infrastructural needs by that time. This includes upscaling biodiesel and ethanol production to run existing machinery that cannot yet run on electric or hydrogen power, including planes, freighters, etc.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 11 months ago

27 years is a long time. Full replacement or retrofit is doable in that kind of time.

[–] GenEcon@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Thats the whole point: it doesnt call for the reduction of fossil fuels. The idea behind the draft is that we continue to invest and consume fossil fuels until some magic technology saves us by capturing and storing the CO2.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

These are pipe dreams, the same way that the 1.5 pledges were.