[HN Gopher] China emissions exceed all developed nations combined
___________________________________________________________________
China emissions exceed all developed nations combined
Author : throwkeep
Score : 28 points
Date : 2021-05-07 18:39 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| platinumrad wrote:
| Now do emissions per capita.
| MikeUt wrote:
| Why? We are told that having a child is the most
| environmentally damaging decision one could make. And the
| developed world already has sub-replacement fertility - for
| about half a century now. But that counts for nothing?
| splithalf wrote:
| The climate doesn't care about per capita though. If more than
| half of all coal plants are in China, then China needs to
| change if we have any hope of moving the needle. All the other
| countries can change but it won't matter.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Some people are interested in carbon-accounting, others are
| interested in moral-accounting. What the moral accounters may
| not realize is that their accounting is rarely useful for
| solving problems, and is often actively harmful. The first
| step to making progress in many areas is to say "OK, let's
| forget about trying to find someone to blame".
| throwkeep wrote:
| It's not the vital stat from the climate's perspective, but:
|
| 1. Qatar
|
| 2. Kuwait
|
| 3. UAE
|
| 4. Saudi Arabia
|
| 5. Luxembourg
|
| 6. Australia
|
| 7. USA
|
| 8. Canada
|
| 9. Estonia
|
| 10. Kazakhstan
|
| https://www.statista.com/chart/20903/countries-emitting-most...
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Of course China is going to be emitting more carbon, they are
| trying to climb their way up to first world living standards. And
| why not, they have the human capital, they have the will, and
| they have the organizational capacity to make it happen.
|
| They are not going to let the hangups of the West be a roadblock
| on that march.
|
| Neither, for that matter, will India.
|
| These types of worries are strictly for the West, and third world
| nations participate in the global warming outcry because they see
| an opportunity for obtaining subsidies from this project.
|
| The moment there are costs instead of subsidies, and third world
| nations are portrayed as perpetrators deserving of fines instead
| of victims deserving of subsidies, you will see the developing
| world rapidly lose interest in this project of curtailing carbon
| emissions. It will be absolutely hilarious when people in the
| West realize that none of these nations are their allies in the
| fight against global warming, that everyone in the developing
| world is far more interested in improving their economy once the
| spigot of subsidies is cut off.
|
| China is worried about technological progress, employment, and
| social stability. Everything else is nice-to-have. I don't blame
| them.
| magicsmoke wrote:
| Global warming is going to hit everyone, developed or
| developing. The fact that China and other developing nations
| know this but are still willing to take the incoming damage
| just shows how much it sucks to be a undeveloped country. But
| for developed countries what probably sucks more is that this
| is a problem they cannot solve without the help and sacrifice
| of the poor majority of the world, and the carbon poor would
| love nothing more than watch the carbon rich suffer the same
| pain as them.
|
| For once, the developed world is at the mercy of decisions made
| in the developing world, and suddenly they have to try and
| appease instead of ignore or bully. That cannot be a
| comfortable realization.
| zackees wrote:
| No, global warming is not going to be a problem. The earth
| has been much warmer than it is today. The IPCC has been
| riddled with fraud and it's clear in 2021 that the news is
| being driven by a network of insiders hell bent on excluding
| heterodox.
|
| Global warming alarmism is a purely political artifact. The
| idea that it's a fringe belief is driven by propaganda from
| the mainstream networks.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| > "For once, the developed world is at the mercy of decisions
| made in the developing world, and suddenly they have to try
| and appease instead of ignore or bully. That cannot be a
| comfortable realization."
|
| Well, that is certainly one way of looking at things. I have
| never encountered anyone who actually believes that, until
| now. The fact of the matter is that most people don't care a
| whole lot about global warming one way or another. Not in the
| U.S. Not in Europe, and certainly not in China. To be clear,
| I'm not saying that, if asked, "Do you _care_? " that they
| respond "No, I don't care." People like to view themselves as
| caring about things. But rather if asked "How much are you
| willing to _spend_ ", the answer is usually " _very little_.
| ". So the revealed preferences in the US are not too
| different from revealed preferences in China.
|
| 68% of Americans wouldn't pay more than $10 a month to combat
| climate change. That's to "combat", not even "solve".
|
| So I don't think most people are unsettled or even surprised
| at China ignoring climate change. If we are only willing to
| pay less than $120 per year, then you would expect a nation
| with 1/3 our income to be willing to spend very little. So an
| objective assessment doesn't lead to any uncomfortable truths
| other than there is only a minority that is truly concerned
| about this issue, and that such concern appears to be a
| luxury good even in the West, and therefore will not be a
| major factor in the developing world.
| [deleted]
| throwawayy12 wrote:
| In other words: "Despite being world factory China's emission per
| capita is only 57% of US's"
| coward76 wrote:
| If you don't like it, stop buying manufactured goods there.
| Supply stops when demand drys up.
| zackees wrote:
| No, this won't do any good. People at scale have to be nudged
| by price before they change their buying habits.
|
| China pollutes with reckless abandon and US manufacturing has
| been hollowed out because of cheap manufacturing. The cost
| savings in china includes being free to pollute and extremely
| low labor costs, and other factors.
| jokoon wrote:
| I'm still curious to do this carbon accounting when you consider
| exports.
|
| This gets much more complicated but it would draw a fair picture.
| _Microft wrote:
| Here are graphs for the US, China and Germany. You could add
| all three to a single graph but it is bugged and does not show
| which curve belongs to which country then. Better show them
| side by side in different windows:
|
| https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption...
|
| https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption...
|
| https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption...
|
| This is the article belonging to these graphs (you can choose
| countries yourself and have all graphs in the article be change
| according to your choice):
|
| https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emis...
| MikeUt wrote:
| > when you consider exports.
|
| Exports aren't a gift - they get something in return for them,
| just as for other economic activity. So why would you not
| consider their emissions?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-07 23:01 UTC)