this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
86 points (94.8% liked)

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

5282 readers
566 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
[email protected]
86
Rich countries ‘trap’ poor nations into relying on fossil fuels (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I am a bit puzzled. Why are they forced to invest into fossil fuel projects when they are, as stated, not profitable enough?

Is the problem that they need energy projects and all of them are too expensive or is fossil fuel the problem because it already exists ? Also Fossil fuels are also widely used by the "Rich" countries.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t really understand it properly but it seems that the debt repayment is pegged to future fossil fuel revenue.

Mozambique was plunged into a debt crisis when oil and gas prices fell in 2014-16, Ribeiro said, but the solutions from international lenders to bail out the country have relied on loans being repaid through future gas revenues.

So I guess they can’t not repay the debt and they can only pay it back one way.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

In the case of Mozambique Total has an unfinished project developing a gas field and building an LNG terminal. Due to ISIS attacking similar infrastructure in the country, they stopped construction. However Mozambique is already in a lot of debt and is just about able to serivce it. If Toal finishes the gas projects however, it becomes much more likely that Mozambique pays back its debt. Obviously the lenders lobby for fossil fuels in this case.

However the loans are not directly tied to the gas project and Mozambique could go renewable to repay its loans, but the LNG project is by far the most likely as construction has already started.

https://theexchange.africa/countries/mozambiques-debt-repayment-hinges-on-totals-lng-project/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-56886085

load more comments (3 replies)