• @EmrysOfTheValley@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      261 month ago

      Yes but it’s not to late to stop the worse of it, if we keep our governments and companies accountable we can limit the worse of it.

    • @gimsy@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      131 month ago

      Don’t worry now we have AI stuff and it will solve all out problems

      AI driven carbon sequestration Temperature reduction with neural networks deep learning

      See? You can relax now, silicon valley tech and the invisible hand of capitalism will solve everything

  • Dr. Bob
    link
    fedilink
    English
    831 month ago

    This is a really interesting visualization. I love the density of the data and the way it captures the year over year variability by month while allowing the annual variability to plainly stand out. This is really good.

  • @Eheran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    751 month ago

    The color grading of the years is really bad. The last 20/30 years are all very low in contrast compared to each other, while 1940s and 60s are easy to tell apart, where it is least important. There are so many more colors than yellow/orange/brown, we can use them to get more information density.

    • @BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      28
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Making data beautiful is what this community is about. But compromising readability for a color scheme is just annoying. Present data first, worry about it being extra pretty second.

      We’re already looking at time being encoded differently than the usual horizontal axis, don’t make it harder.

      On the other hand, if the purpose of the graph isn’t to present individual data points, but to present the monthly trends, then maybe it would have been OK, if the last 3 decades could have started over with a higher luminance set of colors. IDK but I think I would have used colors with more contrast and dropped the warm earthy theme.

    • @wischi@programming.dev
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      171 month ago

      Quite the contrary. I have a red-green deficiency (and so do about 6% of men). Viridis Color scale is pretty nice but two much colors are hard to read for a lot of people

      • Dark Arc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 month ago

        We need to invent an image format that let’s chart colorw be tweaked after the fact lol

        • @grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Actually, that’s a feature that was common going all the way back to the very earliest image file formats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indexed_color

          It’d be easy enough to make the chart a plain old GIF or indexed PNG; the only non-trivial part is that you’d need add some code to the page it’s embedded in to swap out the color palette. (You could also make it an SVG and manipulate it even more easily using the DOM.)

          • Dark Arc
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 month ago

            Well, the image format is based on indexed color for compression purposes … But it’s not like it calls out “these indexes should be customizable”.

    • catsarebadpeople
      link
      fedilink
      -21 month ago

      Glad there’s someone here who cares about what’s really important about this graph! /s

  • @rayyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    501 month ago

    In a deep red area here. Talked to locals and they say our temperatures have always fluctuated and that this is just a cycle. I explained that the CO2 in the atmosphere has been climbing steadily and it is at the point it was 100,000 years ago, (actually it was 33 MILLION years) - their eyes glaze over.

    • If it’s a cycle, ask them when the dinosaurs will come back. When they say “not like that,” ask if the continents will come back together. When they say that won’t happen, ask them to confirm that everything is changing, except the climate.

  • @Plopp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    481 month ago

    I like this graph a lot. It’s different, beautiful and gives a good overview. The colors could have been slightly better though.

    • @Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      121 month ago

      I’m just hoping that this past year’s jump is due to El Nino and/or higher solar activity and that we have a decade or more before those temps are normal (or low since it’ll keep trending upwards for at least 30 years after we stop releasing carbon).

      Hoping but not holding my breath.

  • @arymandias@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    361 month ago

    If it was possible I would put quite some money on that geo engineering (like stratospheric aerosol injection) will be seriously discussed on a UN level within ten years. Climate change seems only to speed up and co2 emissions are still rising. At one point there is simply no alternative.

    • mozz
      link
      fedilink
      341 month ago

      Greta Thunberg talks about it in her book - if the bathtub is overflowing in your house and water is spilling across the floor everywhere, step 1 for most people is to turn off the water. Yes sure it is fine to look for towels and buckets to try to contain the damage (and I don’t even disagree with you that it’ll be needed), but that also assumes that they’ll work and there will be political support to deploy them at scale, instead of mustering up the political support to turn the fucking taps down since at this point that’s clearly needed and is relatively speaking much much easier.

      • @CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        191 month ago

        Exactly. The problem is that too many of the world’s leaders don’t want to upset the capital holders by limiting greenhouse gases.

        These people are literally the people that Alfred told Bruce Wayne about: some men just want to see the world burn.

        But at least we created some great shareholder value.

        • mozz
          link
          fedilink
          91 month ago

          It’s honestly most akin to an AI model over optimizing for the trained outcome even when it turns out it was misaligned from the good outcome we wanted.

          They certainly don’t want their grandchildren to inhabit a barely-livable hellscape instead of the paradise world they were born into, but they’ve been optimizing for money for so long that it’s baked in now, and it’s so so easy to just say, well it’s probably not a big deal, or I don’t think the science is really all that dire in its predictions, or oh well someone else will probably figure it out. And so, every year, we keep setting records for “production”.

      • Boozilla
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        What frustrates the hell out of me is that if they would just allow everyone who can work from home do so, it helps cut down emissions. It won’t solve the whole thing, of course. But it’s a super easy way to make a difference.

        But control freak bosses are all “Good news, everyone! You must return to working in the office. Because it is so much better. It makes me feel important, you see. If I don’t see your butts in chairs in front of monitors, I don’t think you’re actually doing anything.”

        Minor stuff like that makes me think that we’re really doomed here. Late stage capitalism won’t even do the easiest of easy things about climate change.

        • @JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Hah, jokes on them, I don’t do anything at the office, either.

          In fact I dare say I do less, due to less efficient monitor placement and constant door-knockers. At least at home the only one knocking on my door is a 5yo asking for help in Mario.

          Oh and the pointless meetings where I have to be present in person and actually look attentive, even though realistically there’s no damn reason I even should’ve been invited.

          • Boozilla
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 month ago

            Yup. It’s just human storage and performative “productivity”. It’s about making the people who take credit for the hard work of others look and feel necessary.

      • @arymandias@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I was more stating what I think will happen rather than wat we should be doing.

        In terms of pure physics it is ofc easier to turn off the metaphorical tap, but in terms of power and politics we seem unable to transition to renewables. And I’m afraid once we switch on the geo-engineering button we still won’t transition. Only once oil is priced out of the market completely, be it fusion or abundant solar and wind (with energy storage), will we make the transition. But again I might be too pessimistic.

    • @wischi@programming.dev
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      71 month ago

      I also think that this is what will happen (not only discussed) but unless we master fusion it’s practically just fixing a symptom and we’d have to do that for quite a while and the oceans will probably become too acidic.

      • @arymandias@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        91 month ago

        Fusion would solve a lot, but even if we invent room-temperature superconductors today, it would still take so much time to roll fusion out on a big scale and replace oil infrastructure with electric infrastructure.

        I tend to be very pessimistic about climate change, but I hope I’m wrong.

    • @MNByChoice@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      61 month ago

      There already is no alternative. The amount of CO2 released is going to stay high for a long time (centuries?). People are dying from the current weather.

      For the expected response: We need to also stop making things worse. Humanity can do two things at once.

    • @Gsus4@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Wouldn’t aerosols reduce solar irradiance globally, hence reducing the rate of photosynthesis globally…which further reduces natural CO2 capture? How would that help?

  • @BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    14
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    We’re cooked or gonna be. Given we’re still full swing energy craving, reversing the inertia of this massive shift isn’t gonna happen in a lifetime

    • Ben Matthews
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11 month ago

      Depends whose lifetime. Mine, maybe not, but for my children - yes. Also depends what indicator - global CO2 emissions maybe falling this year, but temperature will lag decades, sea-level even more (btw I do model these scenarios, so know well how they diverge ).

  • @Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    51 month ago

    Why does it seem like this is only the northern hemisphere and not truly “global”? Shouldn’t it be warm in the southern hemisphere when it’s cold in the north? So shouldn’t these groupings generally hover around an average between northern and southern hemisphere temps?

    • @pietervdvn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      281 month ago

      Because the northern hemisphere is mostly land mass and the southern hemisphere is mostly ocean. Land heats faster and cools faster than ocean, thus the seasonal effects are more pronounced in the data.

      Same with CO2 patterns which gives a similar yearly ‘breathing effect’

    • Dark Arc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      What’s your source that there’s not warming in the southern hemisphere?

      The temperature readings would look different because winter and summer are flipped, but they absolutely should be attributing a similar effect.

      • @Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        31 month ago

        That’s what I thought… But if it’s winter in the north then it’s summer in the south, so you’d expect them to average in a way that you wouldn’t see such stark differences between say January and July. In July it’s winter in the south, summer in the north. Intuitively I’d assume they’d average. Temps would still be rising year over year, but you wouldn’t see a difference between months. A couple people have answered that it has to do with the earths tilt and the fact that there’s more landmass in the north. Seems plausible I guess.

    • @driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The way earth rotate around the sun is not a perfect circle, but more like an ellipse, that plus the earth rotational axis makes the summers and winters of the global north and south don’t correspond exactly. This is why there’s a difference of ~4 Celsius between average January vs average July.

  • @amotio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    31 month ago

    It took me a while to read that chart, meybe the heat I don’t know.

    But what I got is roughly 1.5°C increase in the last 80 years, is that correct? Would be nice to see this compared to the previous 80 years.

    • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      11 month ago

      Closer to 1C at the moment, but here’s a graph if you want to compare temperature changes over the last century.

      https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/?intent=121

      The trouble with going back further is that there wasn’t global coverage of people keeping accurate records of temperatures in times past. So they have to look at things like tree rings and make comparisons with historical records. Obviously it gets a little fuzzy going back more than a century. But here’s an xkcd that gives a summary of what we know about historical (and pre-historical) global temperatures.

      https://xkcd.com/1732/

  • @Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    21 month ago

    Yeah, record breaking cold temperatures. Fuck this shit! It’s a bloody ice age again.