Exactly - current extinction rates are estimated to be 100-1000 times higher than the natural backround rate, which is why many ecologists started calling this the "Holocene extinction" decades ago.

[–] TingoTenga@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Nice, long article for doom scrolling. Highly recommended.

Three-hundred-million years ago, the planet repeatedly lost control of its carbon cycle and suffered 90m years of mass extinctions, including two of the biggest global catastrophes of all time – both CO2-driven nightmares. In one case, it nearly died. It was felled, in the words of the palaeontologist Paul Wignall, by “a climate of unparalleled malevolence”. At the very end of the Permian period (252m years ago), enough lava erupted out of Siberia and intruded into the crust that it could have covered the lower 48 US states a kilometre deep.

A kilometre deep.

(,,,) the best estimate is that we’re emitting carbon perhaps 10 times faster than even the mindless, undirected Siberian volcanoes that brought about the worst mass extinction ever.

[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

On... our... way??!

[–] TuffNutzes@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Keep churning out the CO2 and the plastic. All that matters is the next quarterly earnings report and shareholder satisfaction.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

On our way? We’ve been in it for a while

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

Welcome to the anthropocene extinction event; it's been going on for a while, but it's only going to get worse

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I hope so. Make it quick.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

It’s happening lightning fast relative to other mass extinction events on the geological timescale

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

Yes please! The world deserves a fresh start.

[+] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io -9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I doubt that. The reason is that global economy phases out fossil fuels in favour of renewable energy sources

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.COMM.FO.ZS?end=2023&start=1990&view=chart

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That graph has a really optimistic looking downturn on fossil fuels as a percentage of energy production … until you look at the labels on the y axis. Dropping most of the way would be a damn huge improvement. Dropping from 80 to 75 is a nice improvement but too little too late unless we speed it up.

I’m calling lying by statistics

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 months ago

It is also meaningless as fossil fuels are growing, just not as fast as renewables and nuclear are. Things are getting decidedly worse as all the clean energy coming on line is only supplementing fossil fuel use, it is not displacing any of it.

Shit getting wild and is going to get wilder.

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Moving 5% of fossil energy to renewables in a year is absolutely massive

If you look at Wikipedia articles about photovoltaics growth, you'll see 25-27% growth per year. Compounding. This is insane rate.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes 5% is still big but we needed it a decade ago. We’re running late and need to make up for lost opportunity

….. and I live in a country that seems determined to reclaim our place as the top polluter, and to throw away any hope of building for the future

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

and I live in a country that seems determined to reclaim our place as the top polluter

If you mean the Trumps policy "Drill Baby Drill", then let me tell you this: Trump is pissing against the wind. Oil extraction will only get more expensive while solar power will only get cheaper.

No matter what he does, the economy will push towards cheaper energy source.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

While I agree on the basic economics and even taco can’t hold back time…

he can and has slowed down EV adoption
he can and has slowed down buildout of renewables, costing thousands of jobs
his lack of enforcement certainly means some polluter will pollute more
if he succeeds in permanently neutering EPA, we’ll all suffer for a generation
he can and has blocked renewables, battery, EV manufacturing in the US
he can and has invented automakers to backtrack to yesterdays technology, leaving them with a precarious future unable to compete that will potentially cost hundreds of thousands of jobs and a regional economic base

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

collapsed inline media