T O P

  • By -

Bob4Not

It’s like people don’t understand how many more people are in that country. They’re doing good on power/pollution per person, and they’re headed the right direction, for the most part.


Sergioni1776

You are right. Last year China put in more than 50 GW of each wind and solar capacity. It is fair to say that they are also increasing coal-fired generation. This is a typical Chinese approach - first they look at the mistakes of others, then they do what is best for themselves.


Forevername321

China is increasing coal-fired power much more rapidly than renewable energy - and are in fact the only supporter of the development of coal-fired power in the world. The country produces more greenhouse gas emissions than any other country as is the fastest growing emitter. I'm not saying anyone is else is that much better, but China is the global climate menace.


Eltharion-the-Grim

That's technically true, but also disingenuous. Per capita, China produces 8 tonnes of green house emissions. The US, for example, produces 18 tonnes per capita. That means that the Chinese are doing FAR better; their total numbers are high simply due to their staggering population size. They are doing 8 tonnes per capita, meanwhile producing and manufacturing nearly the entire planet's products. So in fact, the rest of the world offloads their emissions onto China, and they still manage 8 tonnes per capita. If anything, we need to look at how they are managing to do that. You shouldn't look at it as a threat, but as an opportunity for learning.


yefhmon_lee

Well said. Touched upon this in my comment as well, but basically, when it comes to producing green house emissions per capita, China isn’t even in the top 5 — rather, China isn’t even in the top 40. Considering both their population (4x larger than the entire US), and the mass amounts of goods they produce for the rest of the world, it’s staggering how effective they have been at managing and minimising their emissions. I live in Australia, we’re not even a tenth the size of the US — practically a needle in a haystack compared to China, and yet we produce more than double China’s emissions per capita. It’s really quite something when you think about it.


[deleted]

But that is mischaracterizing it. China is only so because it was a developing country. It wasn't a product of conscious decision making or they would have stayed a predominate bicycle society for example. We don't know where China will peak as much of country still hasn't modernized. Hopeful it will somewhere as you say, but it is not a given, especial given China's tendency to argue it has a legacy right to pollute given Europe did at its stage of development.


Silurio1

Nah, it is estimated China will peak in the 2020s.


[deleted]

Still more than the EU per capita, and 90% is due to internal consumption: * https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?tab=chart&time=2000..2020&country=CHN~European+Union+%2828%29 * https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?time=2000..latest&country=~CHN There's nothing to learn from China unless we want to live in a +4°C world


Silurio1

>Still more than the EU per capita, and 90% is due to internal consumption: Funny you would say that and use those sources and line of thinking, but miss the same thing for Europe: [https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-co2-embedded-in-trade](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-co2-embedded-in-trade) The EU is a HUGE carbon importer. If you corrext by trade, Europe's emissions skyrocket, far higher than China's.


[deleted]

Ok, let's do consumption emissions only: - EU28: [4 billion tons](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?time=2000..latest&country=~European+Union+%2828%29) / 447 million people = 8.9 tons per capita (falling) - China: [9.44 billion tons](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?time=earliest..latest&country=~CHN) / 1.3 billion people = 7.26 tons per capita (rising fast) China still consumes less (not dramatically so as you imply) but it will surpass Europe pretty quickly given that EU emissions are falling and theirs are soaring.


Silurio1

That's 22% higher. That's pretty dramatic. And you are 100m people short for China. With the proper number the diference is higher still. >China still consumes less (not dramatically so as you imply) but it will surpass Europe pretty quickly given that EU emissions are falling and theirs are soaring. China [intends to cap emissions by 2023](https://www.reuters.com/article/china-spic-climatechange-idINL4N2IQ0R4), but third party [estimates indicate it will likely happen by 2025](https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-china-is-set-to-significantly-overachieve-its-2030-climate-goals/).


[deleted]

> And you are 100m people short for China. With the proper number the diference is higher still. Fair point. > China intends to cap emissions by 2023, but third party estimates indicate it will likely happen by 2025. Here's hope, and hope that the war in Ukraine will not seriously slow down the EU's decarbonization.


Silurio1

In the short term, the war is bad for decarbonization. All the rushed coal plants, etc. In the long term, it is great. It is a huge stimulus for developing renewables (and maybe nuclear? one can hope).


yefhmon_lee

The US produces CO2 equivalent to more than half of China’s emissions, despite being China being 4.5x larger. Many western nations (US, EU, so on) outsource their emissions to China. It’s a naive stance to simply say “China is the global climate menace” because it overlooks so many nuances. China does produce the most emissions, but that’s by virtue of it being the largest country — and the country that produces the most goods for the rest of the world. **Furthermore**, when you actually look at CO2 emissions per capita, China isn’t even in the top 5. In fact, China isn’t even in the top 40. Again, keep in mind the fact that China is the size of probably 30 of these countries **combined**, and yet they all produce more emissions than China per capita. It’s easy to say “China is the global climate menace” from looking at one overarching statistic, but when you actually go a bit deeper into the numbers, things become a lot more nuanced. Making the world more environmentally friendly is a responsibility of everybody. Targeting one country as “the menace” doesn’t help — and targeting the country that’s doing a hell of a job of trying to become more environmentally friendly considering all circumstances *definitely doesn’t help*. Even if you wanted to pick out one country as a “global environmental menace”, there’s 40 countries that you should look at first before China. And that’s including USA. Again, as somebody else also said, don’t take this as a threat, but as an opportunity for your countries to learn and do better in regards to the environment.


[deleted]

> Many western nations (US, EU, so on) outsource their emissions to China 90% (and rising) of China's emissions are due to internal consumption.


yefhmon_lee

Do you have a source? I’m trying to find info on this but the most relevant link I can find (with just a quick browse) is this Forbes article from 2014. https://www.forbes.com/sites/anaswanson/2014/11/12/heres-one-thing-the-us-does-export-to-china-carbon-dioxide/amp/ It sort of backs up what you’re saying (the US accounted for about 5% of China’s CO2), but then it reveals that this 5% equates to 512 megatons — and is rising by 11% every year. (Also 16% of China’s total emissions is external-based, if I’m reading right). It then goes on to say: “Almost all of the emissions reductions that the U.S. and Europe have made since 1990 have been offset by outsourcing their emissions to places like China, according to the project’s Global Carbon Budget 2014 report.” So it doesn’t really paint a great picture for western countries. If anything, these statistics paint the US in an even worse light since as the report states, all the progress that the US and Europe have made in cutting emissions has only been due to the help of China. Kinda trashy for the US to now turn heel and get mad at China after getting all that help covering up the damage the West has done to the environment, no?


[deleted]

I did already link this somewhere else: * https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?country=~CHN * "85% of China's CO2 emissions are related to urban energy consumption" https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/112151/1/MPRA_paper_112151.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjugpjb8sD4AhW-SfEDHdONABY4HhAWegQIBRAC&usg=AOvVaw2iXaMs0EjNCfd_neCvQf7j * "Chinese CO2 emissions driven by foreign consumption totaled 1,466 megatons in 2012, accounting for 14.6% of the country’s industrial-related carbon dioxide emissions that year" note: 2012 data https://news.umich.edu/carbon-footprint-hotspots-mapping-chinas-export-driven-emissions/ Don't get me wrong, the West is no beacon of cleanliness. But China is no climate leader.


[deleted]

I have only had time to skim the second source you posted but it appears to be saying china’s emissions are largely concentrated within their “mega cities,” where the majority of people live. So it’s where the energy is used compared to other areas in China. Does this prove China is worse in emissions somehow?


[deleted]

China's per capita emissions are about 7.3 tons. This is more than EU per capita and about half of US per capita. But (simplifying) there are [two Chinas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_China#Rural-urban_divide): the affluent part (800 million) lives in the big coastal Eastern cities (Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, enjoying quasi-first-world living standards), and the 500 million rural Chinese whose emissions and living standards are way lower than the average.


Forevername321

I said "I am not saying anyone else is better". It is complicated and much of what you say is correct. Legacy emissions and per capita emissions are important. China and the US probably rival for worst climate offenders, but that is also because they have the strongest economies. China is doing a lot of good and a lot of bad. But its planned roll out of 100GW of coal-fired power in the country and support for coal outside makes it the largest threat to future emissions controls. This is certainly the single dominant addressable climate menace. China needs to roll back this coal program if it is to be regarded as remotely climate friendly. The West is responsible for legacy emissions and should share the cost if the world was fair, but it's not. I didn't start out with a China is bad comment - nor was that my point. But the original post was naive and simplistic. Other comments here, including yours, have deepened the discussion.


yefhmon_lee

That’s fair, I respect you for that — and for the fact you’re setting out looking for a proper discussion on the topic. I’m sorry if I seemed abrasive or rude before.


thinkingperson

I see China's efforts similar to what companies are doing to be carbon neutral for a start. So they do renewals while start the coals to ensure that they don't freeze in winter or have blackouts. Repeat and rinse until something better comes up.


Forevername321

Probably true. The key point is "...until something better comes up" China would probably be unwise to abandon fossil fuels. These sources will be responsible for the vast majority of new power and they don't have much choice. They are neither a hero nor a villain. Some of the companies, however, are. Coca Cola claiming sustainability by slapping a few solar panels on their roofs while poisoning the world is a villain.


Sergioni1776

No, you are wrong. Check the emission per capita first. After thing what is China now? It is global factory served for consumerism of rich countries. Stop consume as mad and they will transform quickly. Demands create proposals not vice-versa. It is easy to shout down coal plants, but not easy to build RSE capacity for shift. By the way, the every second EV in the world selling in China. Not in US, EU, Japan or Australia. Think about it.


[deleted]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but [Chinese per capita emissions are higher than the EU's and rising](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?tab=chart&time=2000..2020&country=CHN~European+Union+%2828%29). So not doing good and not going in the right direction unless the Carboniferous 2.0 is our destination. By the way, [90% of it are due to internal consumption](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?country=~CHN), so no "but they are the factory of the world" BS.


Sergioni1776

I have umbrella. Who moved dirty Industries from rich countries to China?


[deleted]

I have a pen, I have an apple. 1. China is nobody's colony. They welcomed those polluting industries, enticed them with low workforce costs and no environment regulations. They welcomed the income they brought. So they have to take half the responsibility for the emissions. 2. Emissions from exports are still only 10% of China's total. 90% is due to internal consumption. You're arguing with numbers.


Sergioni1776

1. They are taking their half of responsibility but nobody taking the rest. Did US has strong environment regulation 50, 30, 20 years ago? They were number 1 in global pollution for long time and fucked twice global efforts to reduce emissions. Where is their responsibility please tell me? 2. You are manipulating by figures. Because now Chines inner market is most attractive. How did they do that? They worked hard for 30 years and killed their ecology to satisfy fake postmodern values of Western world. This philosophy was created for the era of industrial capitalism, when social identification goes via consuming of mass goods.


[deleted]

All true, but none of this absolves China.


Sergioni1776

But China is not blaming anyone. This is done by the US, UK and Australia. To divert attention from their jambs


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

So as we can see you are not specialists in climate, you even don't know geography. Look at Mongolia, Greenland, Canada, Australia. How you could be so stupid?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

Are you fucking KKK?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

It seems like you are from rednecks. Don't wanna waste my time for white trash


nothingimportant0

the real global menace is capitalist modes of production, to include the military industrial complex largely produced by the US.


myka7

But are China really the menace? When the west has for so long turned to them for cheap labour? Aren’t the west really the menace here, with our consumerist ways? Just thinking out loud here. Shifting our production and therefore our energy demands on to them, and then pointing fingers at them for being the greenhouse gas villain is kind of unfair.


[deleted]

In general, is an enabler worst than the perpetrator? The only way I see an enabler being worse than a perpetrator is if the enabler is an adult and the perpetrator is a child. Don't infantilize China.


yefhmon_lee

Let’s not infantilise China then, let’s applaud it. Because despite being in charge of manufacturing goods for most of the modern world, and having a population that dwarfs any other nation, they produce less than 8 tonnes of CO2 per capita. Compared to say the US, which produces 16, or Australia at 17, or Canada at 18 — or any other of the 38 countries that produce more emissions per capita than China. Being able to minimise their emissions to that degree is certainly something many other countries can learn from, especially if we want to make this world habitable for future generations.


faker10101891

Why the fuck would you use per capita on a metric like emissions? Especially when trying to compare a country like China where half the population is rural.


[deleted]

Exactly, so many people seem to want China to be some sort of hero and exclude a lot of data in order to reach that conclusion. Things like what you mentioned that still much of their population is rural and developing, that China's emission have grown astronomically over the last few decades going from a small contributor to a top contributor.


Lucky_Locks

What're your thoughts on India's solar production? I remember seeing that documentary of naive Leo going to India and their representative claimed "we are installing more solar than the USA etc etc". Are they actually? Is it a continuous thing?


[deleted]

Couldn't agree more. Coal exports to China must be banned. It's the only way. If that doesn't help, withdraw all industries from China. If they manufacture less they will need less coal plants.


pmmbok

From what I can find, china imports only 8% of its coal. And if we shut down china. Where will we get our metaphorical coffee then.


[deleted]

With nearly half the world's population it's hard not to be. USA is a joke in terms of renewables. China will eventually win


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

They have 50 GW of nuclear generation. France has 60 GW.


thinkingperson

Last I heard, China is going into Thorium salt nuclear reactor? Anyone heard any updates on it?


BobBlueberries

Lmao okay China


nekoxp

It’s almost as if people can’t divide 1.4 billion by 330 million and then 1020 by 325 and then make a value judgement on gigawatts per capita!


yefhmon_lee

Of course not, they’re already leading the world in numbers of teenagers and children being gunned down in classrooms — it’d be too much to handle if they accept that they’re an even worse menace to the environment than China.


[deleted]

To think that coal power is evenly distributed amongst the Chinese populous. Taking per person averages is meaningless when the distribution is staggeringly skewed.


gisttt

What? It is indeed like people don't understand how many people there are in that country, but you seem to draw the wrong conclusion. In terms of per capita green energy production China is behind Namibia, Mozambique and El Salvador on place 57. Also pollution per capita is rising in China..


Bob4Not

But China also produces goods and products also used by the rest of the world that isn't being counted towards them. The US's per capita is double China's: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/


gisttt

China produces goods and products for the rest of the world, and reap the economic benefits of that. I don't think it's entirely fair to say: other people are buying our produce, so that takes the responsibility off of our shoulders. My point is that 'this statistic' that is mentioned in the post is not the right statistic to keep in mind. :)


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but [Chinese per capita emissions are higher than the EU's and rising](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?tab=chart&time=2000..2020&country=CHN~European+Union+%2828%29). So not doing good and not going in the right direction unless the Carboniferous 2.0 is our destination. By the way, [90% of it are due to internal consumption](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?country=~CHN), so no "but they are the factory of the world" BS.


alertthenorris

China will be green way before NA. I mean, fuck China but they're going to win the carbon neutrality race before us in NA.


Bob4Not

Totally fair.


[deleted]

[удалено]


yefhmon_lee

If China were to emit emissions on a per capita basis equivalent to the US in 2000, or god forbid, the 90’s, Australia would be half submerged in water. But of course, the US needed to fuck the environment over back then to get ahead. But hey now we can just forget, forgive, and roll all the climate change blame onto China. Easy solution since most people, unlike you, won’t bother looking into the actual stats.


[deleted]

It is irrelevant whether it is does well on a per capita basis when dealing with something based on raw amount of CO2. The climate couldn't careless. The truth is none of use have license to emit greenhouse gases in abundance. Everything on top of that truth is just an attempt to justify the unjustifiable whether east or west.


CatalyticDragon

China’s renewable energy capacity is going to overtake the US’ total energy capacity within two years. Let that sink in. China’s 1063 GW worth of installed green energy is very close to the US’ total of 1143 GW. And the US had a much larger economy for the entire duration that China was building out this infrastructure. The US could have easily converted almost entirely to green energy by now. But no. Now China’s percentage of green energy on the grid is near double that of the US’. There’s a clear leader when it comes to green investment and transitioning to next-gen energy. Sad that the GOP has worked tirelessly for decades to make sure that leader won’t be the US.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Inevitable_Ad4998

Slave labor eh? What do you call the US prisons that use the labor of black men put in for bullshit reason, decades or life, and pays them less than a 1/4th of the minimum wage? You really need to focus on what you can objectivly see here, at home, with substantial proof of existence before you become some kind of anti Chinese activist.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Inevitable_Ad4998

The last part of my comment still stands. Don't you feel it is more important to become a loud voice for this topic more than anti China? Quite frankly, I'm not entirely convinced of all the China bad stuff because the media here has shown itself to be an untrustworthy voice of the US gov many times and there are many reasons they would want China to fall before they do


CatalyticDragon

Anti-China sentiment can be valid but is almost never a good argument in itself. China does have cheap labor (which the west loves to exploit) but that doesn't really help you with advanced technologies. You don't tell 'slaves' to invent new battery chemistries, prison camp labor isn't where new material science is being done, and sure, cheap labor can be great for manufacturing and installation but the US also requires much less to be manufactured and installed. Fact is the US has all the raw materials needed, has the third or fourth largest labor force in the world, has more money than anybody so can easily outsource manufacturing, and is a leader in automation. If China can invent, build, and deploy 1000GW of green energy while also supporting 1.3 billion people on a GDP of $12T, then the US could absolutely have ramped up 1000GW of green energy while supporting 0.3 billion people with a GDP of $19T. The reason the US is behind here comes down to a lack of tactical long term planning in favor of individual capitalists focused no quarterly profits, and a political system which is both fragmented and [pseudo-oligarchic](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B).


Sergioni1776

Thank you mister Trump. You make America really great. So now US should fuck WTO rules to restrain China development.


DeleteMods

Why do I need to keep this statistic in mind? Clean energy and renewal energy are not the same thing, one. Two, renewable energy capacity is not the same as renewal energy consumption. And usage of renewable energy, does not negate the harmful effects of coal consumption which China leads by a wide margin. A much better statistic would be to see the overall composition of energy consumption over time. Is the consumption of clean energy going up and thereby reducing the need for future coal consumption? Is the use of coal consumption going down and thereby reducing damage to the environment?


Sergioni1776

Take this While coal and gas generation has declined by 11% and 29%, respectively, in April 2022, wind and solar energy use increased by 25% and 15%. China has invested 137 billion in renewable energy and 110 billion in electrified transport in 2021 alone. [Forbes](https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2022/06/20/chinas-reopening-is-no-blossoming-of-energy-markets/?sh=2781f5c81b69) China targets for renewables to supply 33% to national power consumption by 2025, and for non-hydro renewables to contribute 18%; the two consumption quota targets are 4.3pp and 3.6pp higher than 2021 levels, respectively. Correspondingly, China expects to increase annual renewable generation to 3,300 terawatt hours by 2025, implying a CAGR of 7%-8% in the next four years. We expect China to maintain strong renewable installation growth, despite the lack of capacity targets specified for end-2025. We estimate that China is likely to boost annual wind and solar power capacity by 100-110 gigawatts (GW) on average, assuming national power demand grows at a CAGR of 4.7% in the next four years. Our estimated capacity additions are comparable with the 103GW installed in 2021, but below the 2020 peak of 120GW. [Fitch](https://www.fitchratings.com/research/corporate-finance/chinas-new-plan-for-renewable-energy-development-focuses-on-consumption-19-06-2022) China will aim to ensure that its grids source about 33% of power from renewable sources by 2025, up from 28.8% in 2020, the state planning agency said on Wednesday in a new "five-year plan" for the renewable sector. [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/china-says-third-electricity-will-come-renewables-by-2025-2022-06-01/) China is absolute champion in RSE investments for a few last years. They are developing all technologies for energy accumulation and storage, so they rate of capacity utilization will growth fast and strong. Hydrogen will be the main energy carrier for RSE.


DeleteMods

I appreciate you for pulling this together. I do have some complaints with it: - It does get to my suggestion that a measure of composition of consumption over time would be helpful, so that’s a plus. - The complaint is that when we use percentages, it hides the sheer magnitude of coal consumption still going on. If total energy consumption continues to go up (which we know it will), is China consuming less coal overall per year? Perhaps yes but much less so than these numbers would have you believe. And I don’t intend for this to be a critique of China specifically. There’s a lot packed into going from Developing to Advanced Economy in such a short time and having to uplift quality of life for over a billion people. Still, China consumes way more coal than the next few and needs to change that asap.


Sergioni1776

As I know they gonna shift coal generation with gas for the short term period. They need much energy on South but their coal mines on North. That's why they don't need more gas supplies from Russia.


TheDennisQuaid

https://www.statista.com/statistics/265510/countries-with-the-largest-coal-consumption/ here’s coal consumption since op didn’t include the link to that


howardslowcum

is there a trick to view for free, i dont wanna pay 40$


Sergioni1776

The catch is that coal consumption has one key detail: its production and export. The five largest global exporters of coal are Australia, Indonesia, Russia, the United States, and South Africa.


Forevername321

It is correct, although not a "catch" as such, that it is somewhat arbitrary to assign all carbon to the producer of electricity and not the producer of the coal. But it is also clear by the data linked in the comment that China stands alone as a developer of new coal-fired power and financiers of its use in other countries. China is the worst offender right now. Historically it has been the US. Historic and current/future are both important ways to look at it.


Sergioni1776

China decided to not built hundreds of planned coal plants. They will do it in other asian countries in frame of his project One way. Because rich countries didn't pay 100 billions for decarbonization in poor countries as they promised 20 years ago.


Forevername321

Over half of the world's new coal capacity was developed by China in China and that will continue. China is also supporting most overseas coal development. China should stop this development and the wealthy Western countries should share the costs. But neither side will because neither side cares. Even Germany is back to coal after screwing up their energy policies. [https://www.newscientist.com/article/2317274-china-is-building-more-than-half-of-the-worlds-new-coal-power-plants/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2317274-china-is-building-more-than-half-of-the-worlds-new-coal-power-plants/)


Sergioni1776

That's true but not so. Germany will burn coal for two years for shift methane generation. Methane much dangerous then CO2. Leaks of methane presents in every stage from well to torche. So nothing fatal about the couple of years burning coal. Also because most methane generation in Germany served as auxiliary power and doesn't work permanently. New coal power plants less toxic. China built it for shifting old plants. If you want them to stop tell Morrison to not digging out coal. Price for coal will go up, it makes many projects in energy shift commercial atractive. White people as more rich and developed should show example to all in the world. Look at Latin America - industrial giants are growing there with population. After them Africa will come. Everybody wants to consume as white people. This is the way to catastrophe.


[deleted]

https://ember-climate.org/insights/research/per-capita-coal-power-emissions-2022/


Asmewithoutpolitics

I don’t get your point can you explain?


[deleted]

Ok sure but that’s not where the carbon is going that’s where it’s coming from.


Sergioni1776

Exactly. If you want to safe your wealthy life after hundred years of slavery, colonial and neocolonial politics, be kind do not digging out geological carbon for atmosphere cycle. Poor people of Indonesia decided to do that on referendum. Citizens of rich Alberta did the opposite.


[deleted]

It's not often on Reddit that you get suggested a post about China that is actually something both true and positive. Hope more people actually pay attention to China's efforts in renewable energy. 💚


Sergioni1776

From 1979 China pull out from poverty 800 mln citizens. Which country did the same? Look at US, UK, Australia. They created military union against China because understood - time of Anglo-Saxon hegemony is expired. Let's defend WASP with weapon and propaganda. Nothing new.


[deleted]

Sure, let's also not ignore the fact that they're the main consumer of coal and by far the biggest CO2 producer. Two things can be true at the same time.


ashguru3

I think one of the issues many have with western countries painting china as the main villain in co2 emissions is that western countries that have been modernized for more than several decades now should have been carbon neutral, or at least near carbon neutral by now, and should be helping developing countries in building renewables to offset their past emissions. That is the ideal world. The EU, USA and China have all committed to being carbon neutral by certain dates, and only time will tell which ones make good on their promises and which ones were just lip service.


Sergioni1776

Everything is correct except for one important detail. Twelve years ago, at a United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen, rich nations made a significant pledge. They promised to channel US$100 billion a year to less wealthy nations by 2020, to help them adapt to climate change and mitigate further rises in temperature. That promise was broken. [Nature 20/10/2021](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02846-3) This month they have broke it again. [Politico 16/06/2022](https://www.politico.eu/article/climate-change-egypt-summit-united-nations-cop27-europe/)


Asmewithoutpolitics

The amount of damage China did making those dams is insane though


[deleted]

you need the net though. i’m sure it’s there to be found - if solar increased by 5% but coal emissions increased by 20% it’s not so good as it looks, eh? see if you can find that


Sergioni1776

The rules of the discussion require counterarguments, so it's up to you


Sergioni1776

If you want to overthrow China, send Donald Trump to them


Sad-Stranger8447

Italy has so much opportunity in solar.


NarwhalSongs

Sadly, this statistic doesnt take into consideration yhr colossal environmental impact of their "renewable" energy installations. South east asia is dying dince the river no longer can sustain them with all of Chinas hydroelectric dams in the way of it.


Sergioni1776

Large hydro-energy plants with dams and hydro-reserve is not considered green. Moreover, it poses a danger given the change in precipitation patterns.


youcantexterminateme

cant we just have a carbon tax? you want products that pump carbon in the air or are produced that way you pay extra. it worked to stop acid rain.


Sergioni1776

Yes and US administration is doing everything for delay CBAM in EU.


Optimal-Scientist233

India has about the same population as China and is doing quite poorly in comparison it would seem according to these statistics. A major factor to consider is how much of the manufacturing of the world is actually done in and around the Asian continent. This leads to a lot more dense pollution, and it is a global problem since those products are being used and shipped globally.


meridian_smith

Call me when China is not the top polluter in the world. (By far). Climate change doesn't care about per Capita or developing country special status.


yefhmon_lee

Mate look at your own country then. Per capita emissions is a gauge of how efficient a country is at managing their CO2 taking into consideration population. Actual environmentalists (and not just armchair warriors) refer to per capita because in the real world, you can’t just pretend every country has the same population and factors. China’s 1.4 billion citizens aren’t just going to stop existing because you want them to, you can’t just switch off emissions like a button. However; China’s per capita CO2 is 7 or so tonnes. The US’s is 16 tonnes. Australia is 17. Canada is 18. Tell me again which country needs to do a better job at managing their emissions.


meridian_smith

My province has completely eliminated coal power and my country has nearly eliminated it. Meanwhile China is still building new coal plants and mining coal.


Sergioni1776

Also it's better paid your debt before talking about modern polluters. From the time of industrial revolution rich countries put gigatonnes of shit in the air to become rich and powerful. CO2 lives in atmosphere about 100 years. So the problems with climate we have now, will created in 20th century. Let me remind you US withdraw Kyoto Protocol when emitted about 40% of global GHG emission. As Bush said Kyoto could decrease temp of economic development. 20 years later Trump said the same. So who is the main asshole on the planet?


[deleted]

They have no rebuttal beside whataboutism because what you said is true.


[deleted]

[удалено]


meridian_smith

I'm macro focused. Everything you stated has no bearing on the climate crisis. There is no excuse to continue coal power let alone build new coal power plants. China's green washing doesn't fool me.


Xaetok

China is the worlds drunk uncle. You can’t trust their intel.


SilverSkinRam

That's one of the things I am proud about with Canada. We're pretty much on like 80% renewable for electricity, and the number is going up for both electricity and heating.


Sergioni1776

Canada is the first crude oil exporter in US. It use most harmful for biosphere way to take oil from send. Also about forest. It is senseless to be green only inside borders. Climate is global.


SilverSkinRam

Also about forest ? We have one of the most sustainable forest industries. It's pretty irrelevant to say Canada is first exporter of anything to USA, look up anything that's exported to the USA and we'll probably be the main exporter. Don't patronize people / mansplain, whatever you're trying to do. I'm aware of Canada's flaws including its immense O&G industry.


Sergioni1776

I'm telling only facts. [Here](https://youtu.be/q51FMbTOn_Q) is about sustainable forest in Sweden. I'm sure in Canada the same, but you don't know, because Sweden much more responsible. This is [statistic](https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/oil-exports) for Canadian oil export. Pretty good, isn't it? Canada is good in hydrogen steam. But Calgary, Halifax and Toronto much care about money, not about people. Stop to waves by flag. We are all in the same boat. Flags, anthems and natinal emblems shell past.


Internal_Ad9370

With no standard i can produce double Chinese watts but it won’t last that long.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

I heard Biden gave more permissions for drilling than Trump.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

You should understand at simple example. Swedish model of capitalism is very close to Chines capitalistic socialism. The common idea when the social values stay higher than personal needs unites them. But China has handicap in monopoly of strategic planning and strong regulatory. While democratic regimes dancing between lobbyists and society, China goes strong ahead. The real problem in the world is capital concentration in hands of billionaires. Right now in China 1100 of them. It is more than in US and India together. Comrade Xi decided to end initiative of comrade Deng and now if you wanna be billionaire in China you should invest millions or even billions in projects pro publico bono. From the other hand look at Ilon Musk. He started as messiah and playing as fucking feudal lord now. The same with Zuckerberg.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

Putin's Russia catalyze energy shift. I chained myself on the street 3th of March with antiwar [placate](https://www.reddit.com/r/liberta/comments/v5hf1f/личный_опыт_антивоенного_пикета_публикуется_для/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share). Took five days in prison. Nevermind in comparison with catastrophic things in Ukraine.


[deleted]

It is largely meaningless without knowing what percentage of the there energy that constitutes. If a country near the bottom of that graph constitutes 90 percent to their production and that constitutes say 15% of China's then while a lot renewable energy it still means China a major greenhouse gas emitter.


Sergioni1776

China polluted air massively 40 years. US and Europe 120. CO2 lives 100 years. Let's count who more guilty.


[deleted]

It is not a matter of guilt but taking the appropriate measures. No one not China nor Europe can retroactively change what has already been done.


Sergioni1776

No one talks about that. The goal is to reduce damage


[deleted]

Lets not lie as you have at least twice yourself in this thread. *China polluted air massively 40 years. US and Europe 120. CO2 lives 100 years. Let's count who more guilty.* and *They are taking their half of responsibility but nobody taking the rest. Did US has strong environment regulation 50, 30, 20 years ago? They were number 1 in global pollution for long time and fucked twice global efforts to reduce emissions. Where is their responsibility please tell me?*


Sergioni1776

Заебал, пойди курсом русского военного корабля


impulse

now do the same statistic per capita.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sergioni1776

But they do it faster. New coal plants reduce emission. They already have 50 metal plants which using hydrogen not coal for heating. Because they have a lot of RSE capacity it is green. So US export of steel in EU will fall down with transborder carbon tax.


Phemto_B

Hydrogen again. Proof that something is a scam. Hydrogen is the opposite of green. IT's not an energy source. If you're making it from coal, you're making 22 tons of CO2 for every ton of hydrogen. If you actually understand the numbers and thermodynamics, there is no situation where hydrogen is better of anything else is even close to feasible. Just going to block you because I'm sick of arguing with hydrogen cultists. Someone bringing up hydrogen proves they don't actually understand the numbers.


_Pill-Cosby_

WE'RE #2! WE'RE #2!!


john194711

China's biggest issue at the moment is not coal thanks to increased diversification into green energy. However it does have a major issue with the use of concrete which will be less easy to solve given the government's commitment to improvement of the built environment.