as there was no current accepted agreement in climate science on the required amount.
100%. The consensus on the required amount to be cut is 100%.
News and information from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
(This list may get expanded when necessary.)
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.
as there was no current accepted agreement in climate science on the required amount.
100%. The consensus on the required amount to be cut is 100%.
When it comes to emissions from fossil fuels, we'd actually need to go beyond that 100% cut on new emissions, to allow removing historical emissions.
However, the court said Shell was already working to reduce its emissions
Completely absurd at a time when Shell (and the rest of the industry) have all decided to reach their climate goals despite expanding extraction of fossil fuels. This court must be extremely willing to be deceived.
Oil giant wins the right to keep fucking the planet. Great, just fucking great /s
Hurray, time to speed towards total destruction of the world even faster! /s
It's the investors and shareholders who want their money multiplied, they are to blame. When it comes time to take heads, remember the shareholders and (their hatchet man) the CEO.