That’s not really relevant. Fine particulate emissions from coal power plants, which are already mostly gone in the US but are still used around the world, don’t travel a really long distance.
Comment on Can enough solar pannels decrease the global temps?
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 day agoParticipate pollution melts glaciers which increases the temperature long after it fucks shit up by trapping heat in the atmosphere and blocking photosynthesis.
MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 day ago
No, they do.
Precipitate pollution from coal use in India and China is making it to the northern glaciars.
It doesn’t need to be a lot, a small speck on a glacier can “snowball” into a substantial melt because black soot gets hotter than white snow.
When soot settles on snow in large enough quantities, it creates a dark, heat-absorbent film on the otherwise reflective white surface of the snow. This causes the surface to absorb significantly more heat than it otherwise would, which eventually thins the snow down to the glacial ice that sits below the surface layer, causing further retreat.
nbcnews.com/…/coal-soot-darkened-melted-glaciers-…
It’s not like the soot has to blanket it, especially when they’re already melting.
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Just saying “watts staying underground” is a poor explanation. That’s an insignificant amount of energy compared to what the sun is delivering and what’s being trapped by CO2. “Carbon staying underground” is much more the priority.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Which is why I clarified for someone what someone else likely meant…
I’m not sure what you’re doing here, do you want me to go complain to the person who first used that phrasing on your behalf?
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Didn’t realize users changed, my bad.