toweringpine t1_itgbaor wrote
It infuriates me that here in Canada I gotta listen to twits tell me that we can't or shouldn't even try to reduce carbon because China. They refuse to see that China is aggressively changing their ways. A little while longer and they'll be producing more goods for less carbon and they'll be looking at us tapping their feet impatiently waiting for us to catch up. They probably won't wait very long.
Regi0 t1_itgh2ld wrote
China produces the most amount of coal emissions globally, more than most developed countries combined, in order to facilitate the demand for goods in the west. You are, I hope, just woefully ignorant of this.
Source: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/g20-energy-mix-coal-gas-oil-renewables-power-climate-change/
Kruxx85 t1_itgmrti wrote
You just proved the man's point - while right now they are the biggest polluters, they are also, right now, the biggest renewable energy generators and the fastest moving to a zero carbon emission grid. (they currently have triple the renewable energy generation to that of the US)
You can't control the past, but you can shape the future.
Regi0 t1_itgo4aq wrote
Actually, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022, China's carbon emissions have been steadily increasing as of 2021.
Page 12, in the carbon emissions table, near the bottom.
Kruxx85 t1_itgp5gi wrote
I have no doubt they are - do you think that refutes what I said?
Do you know the shape of a parabola?
It continues to go up, but goes up at a reduced rate until... it starts going down.
Regi0 t1_itgpsh3 wrote
Considering they are increasing carbon emissions while simultaneously investing in wind energy, yes I think that refutes what you claim. The goal for China is not less carbon emissions. They are trying to achieve carbon neutrality, and within that goal they stated their carbon emissions will 'peak' before 2030. Which means they will continue increasing carbon emissions into the forseeable future, likely until the last second in 2030.
Source: https://climatechampions.unfccc.int/chinas-net-zero-future/
Kruxx85 t1_itgqrh3 wrote
Do you know the shape of a parabola?
It continues to go up(starting off exponentially), but goes up at a reduced rate until... it starts going down.
Regi0 t1_itgr8ie wrote
Actually, their carbon neutrality claim is for 2060, not 2030. Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/world/asia/china-climate-change.amp.html
Which means their 2030 claim is quite literally just saying carbon emissions might stop rising by 2030. No promises. The ice caps are already melting, by 2060 there will hardly be any left.
Kruxx85 t1_itgs3j2 wrote
Yes, and?
They have had the fastest growing economy over the last 20,30,50 years. That economy has been fuelled by fossil fuels.
They are now the largest producers of renewable energy with a current figure triple that of the US, while their total electrical energy generation is less than double that of the US.
If they were as slow as the US (and other countries) at transitioning to renewables, they would be incredibly further behind where they are now.
Nobody expects things to turn around instantly, it's trends that you look at.
The trending of renewable generation, and the trending of the reduction of fossil fuel generation.
Note, your trend can be downwards even though your absolute figures are still increasing. That was my point with the parabola.
Regi0 t1_itgskj1 wrote
I hope you realize that investing in renewables hardly means anything even if the rate of increase in China's carbon emissions is decreasing. The actual amount dumped into the atmosphere is still increasing regardless. The damage has and is still being done. It's permanent.
Kruxx85 t1_itgtvi0 wrote
Then blame our consumerist society for that.
China's economy is built on the back of our consumerist selves. They are just better at manufacturing what we want, better than we are at it.
They seem to be changing direction. Hopefully that's a global change.
As I said, you can't change the past but you can shape the future.
Regi0 t1_itgyydp wrote
I agree completely. China is no more at fault than the United States. The system itself is killing our planet, and it won't stop unless we all consume less.
I want to have hope.
No-Swimmers1622 t1_itqzxr2 wrote
Tell me you don't know anything about ecology without telling me you don't know anything about ecology, you go first:
> The damage has and is still being done. It's permanent.
Regi0 t1_itr4fbv wrote
Please tell me how we can refreeze the ice caps.
No-Swimmers1622 t1_itr5cx7 wrote
Regi0 t1_itr5w3u wrote
"Because of the glacial pace at which natural carbon sinks absorb CO2, much of the carbon dioxide humans have emitted over the past centuries will remain in the atmosphere for many years to come. This will be true even if humans were to stop emitting all greenhouse gases tomorrow—the planet would need hundreds or thousands of years to cleanse all the excess CO2 people have pumped into the atmosphere during the industrial era."
Not only does this have absolutely nothing to do with the ice caps, this further supports my argument that what we're doing to the planet is basically permanent. The timescale to undo what we've done is hilariously beyond any human lifespan, and it hinges on the impossibility of all carbon emissions ceasing simultaneously.
No-Swimmers1622 t1_itr713n wrote
> >Not only does this have absolutely nothing to do with the ice caps,
Lol, you really don't know anything about global warming, do you?
>this further supports my argument that what we're doing to the planet is basically permanent. The timescale to undo what we've done is hilariously beyond any human lifespan, and it hinges on the impossibility of all carbon emissions ceasing simultaneously.
No, it proves you were spewing bullcrap. The damage is not permanent like you claimed and it can be reversed, both naturally and artificially.
Regi0 t1_itr88lv wrote
Technically nothing is permanent since everything changes, dies, erodes, etc. given a long enough timescale. But I digress, yes, technically what we've done is reversible, but like your source claims, it would take an insane amount of time to reverse what we've done. That time estimate hinges entirely on humanity ceasing all excess carbon emissions at once, meaning the amount of time it would take to reverse the effects grows larger with each day of carbon emissions pumped into our atmosphere. I hope you're arguing in good faith, because if you are, you'd agree with me that in our current economy, we're not going to just suddenly stop burning coal, gas, oil, etc.
No-Swimmers1622 t1_itrfzs2 wrote
> it would take an insane amount of time to reverse what we've done.
Naturally, without human intervention.
>That time estimate hinges entirely on humanity ceasing all excess carbon emissions at once,
No, as long as humanity doesn't go extinct and eventually we stop adding carbon dioxide to the environment the change can be reversed. Nothing that China is doing is permanent the same way nothing that the US is doing is permanent, but if you're going to focus solely on China ignoring the centuries of Western pollution to the world then you are not only technically wrong, you are politically blind
Regi0 t1_itrzois wrote
I'm not, in fact I mentioned in other comment reply chains to my original comment that consumerism is the ultimate problem, not China specifically. US has consumerist demands, China fulfills them by whatever means necessary. It's all fucked.
toweringpine t1_itgmiuv wrote
I am aware. I'm also aware that they are making a big effort to move away from that while we object and bicker about building pipelines, blame them for everything and use that as reason to not change anything here.
Regi0 t1_itgo2p8 wrote
Actually, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022, China's carbon emissions have been steadily increasing as of 2021.
Page 12, in the carbon emissions table, near the bottom.
toweringpine t1_itgoozj wrote
Thank you for making my point. Here we are commenting on an article about them doubling the world's wind generation capacity with one project and you're saying how bad they are. We all know they are bad. Some recognize they are trying to improve. Some screw their eyes shut, stick their fingers in their ears and type foolishness.
Regi0 t1_itgovqb wrote
Investing in more renewable energy hardly means anything if they are increasing carbon emissions simultaneously.
circumtopia t1_iti1jzi wrote
But their share of energy using coal has been decreasing dramatically over the past decade.
Regi0 t1_iti9pgn wrote
Again, bizarre that their carbon emissions are *INCREASING* if their alleged coal usage is going down.
circumtopia t1_itic0d4 wrote
It's not going down in absolute terms but it's certainly going down as a % of their total energy usage. Their electricity usage is spiking because they are making more and more shit.
Regi0 t1_iticani wrote
Exactly, consumerism is increasing, not decreasing. The west demands more and more, so China must produce more and more, for cheap, polluting their part of the world exponentially. It's like an ouroboros. Both superpowers are equally at fault for the state of our planet.
circumtopia t1_itifufn wrote
That's absurd to claim considering the US has double the emissions per capita and has also produced way more emissions throughout its history than China (and benefited from this disregard for the environment).
Even today the most consumerist society on the planet is the US. Period. Demand creates supply not the other way around. If Americans didn't demand a new big TV screen every few years then the Chinese would not build it.
KitchenDepartment t1_itgpq53 wrote
>China produces the most amount of coal emissions globally
And they also produce the most amount of new renewable energy globally.
Turns out that when you are the biggest country in the world. You end up winning a lot of "Most amount" statistics.
Regi0 t1_itgqpxn wrote
Take a look at figure 1 in this source:
fuzzybunn t1_ithergp wrote
Did you also know China has the largest population of any country, more than most developed countries combined? You are, I hope, just woefully ignorant of this.
Source: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/
Regi0 t1_ithk2u2 wrote
What does that matter? They still pump more carbon into the atmosphere than any other country when adjusted for population size. A whopping 70% of their energy is produced via nonrenewables, mostly Coal in this case (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pgglqi/oc_chinas_energy_mix_vs_the_g7/). It's done this way to produce goods as cheaply as possible to meet the consumerist demands of the west.
circumtopia t1_iti22do wrote
In what way are they pumping more carbon than any other country when adjusted for population size? When you say that do you mean per capita?
Regi0 t1_iti9cdw wrote
Initially I did, yes, but I'm realizing China's per capita value for carbon emissions is about half that of the US
Source: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/
Worth nothing that China produces double the amount of CO2 emissions than the second highest, that being the US.
circumtopia t1_itic7ud wrote
Good at least we can admit that.
mutherhrg OP t1_itgmzu2 wrote
And at the rate that they building wind, solar and nuclear, they'll be moving away from coal soon
Regi0 t1_itgo56a wrote
Actually, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022, China's carbon emissions have been steadily increasing as of 2021.
Page 12, in the carbon emissions table, near the bottom.
mutherhrg OP t1_itgot1d wrote
China themselves have stated that it will be decreasing carbon emissions by 2030.
Regi0 t1_itgp18x wrote
The damage has already been done, hun, and the trend for the past 40 years has been constant carbon emission growth despite any and all promises to rely more on renewables. The data doesn't lie.
circumtopia t1_iti1g0g wrote
Their energy usage is increasing as they develop. Their share of energy coming from coal has dropped 15% in the past decade though. You're ignorant of something called context.
Regi0 t1_iti9g8v wrote
Bizarre how their carbon emissions continue increasing then, despite that.
circumtopia t1_itic207 wrote
It's in the first sentence why that would be.
PunchFox t1_itj5q5s wrote
A) They have the highest population in the world. No shit dumbass. Now try doing it per capita.
B) You don't get to offload your country's production onto them and then pretend their emissions from that production are solely their responsibility.
Ftr, not at all a supporter of the Chinese regime, but at least choose reasonable things to criticize, not the few areas that are actually progressive in.
Regi0 t1_itjqx56 wrote
There's several comment reply chains to my original comment that explain my stance on both things you mentioned.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments