4 ms·

Why call out the west? A quick google search shows China as the top contributor to global warming, with Russia and India in the top 5. http://www.ucsusa.org/gl

by mesh 10y ago

Why call out the west? A quick google search shows China as the top contributor to global warming, with Russia and India in the top 5. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#.V2V21OYrJE4 http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/sci... Seems to me this is a world wide issue, that calls for a world wide solution.

cryptoz 10y ago
This is a world problem for sure. However, has the Chinese government or corporations spent billions on efforts to convince the population that climate change is a hoax? Anyone who runs a country that agrees it's a problem is doing better than a country (USA) where so many prominent people in power deny that the earth is changing because of us. That problem in particular seems unique to the west.
- GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
  Uh... despite that, US carbon emissions have dropped over 500 million metric tons from their peak levels. I don't see any movement in that direction from China and India. Actions speak louder than words, after all.
  - themartorana 10y ago
    Is this mostly fuel efficiency in vehicles? I can't imagine solar is having that kind of impact yet, is it? (It would be great if it were.)
    - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
      No, it mainly has to do with the use of Natural Gas instead of coal for electricity generation
  - danbruc 10y ago
    But the USA also has twice the carbon emission per capita of China and India's is almost ten times lower than that of the USA. Comparing carbon emissions but ignoring the differences in population is a bit misleading at the very least. You can really only start complaining about other countries when they pollute more than yourself.
    - sliverstorm 10y ago
      Direction is also important, not just per capita abv
komaromy 10y ago
The west (and the United States in particular) has had ample time and resources to do something about the problem, and failed to act meaningfully. China and India would have had to make much larger sacrifices in terms of individual quality of life to have the same impact.
bmmayer1 10y ago
That's completely unfair. China is a huge importer of CO2 emissions. Where do you think the dollars behind all those plastic toys and electric components come from? Statistics like these don't account for a countries carbon footprint relative to population; there's no way that Poland, with a GDP of $13k per capita, produces fewer CO2 emissions than South Africa with a GDP of $6k per capita. But it is likely that South Africa has more manufacturing and mining operations to support exports.
- chronic80 10y ago
  By your logic, we should in fact blame China for bringing upon themselves this burden by offering low manufacturing prices? Without low prices, "western" consumers would not create such demand. Climate change is absolutely the fault of China, India, Russia and others. Perhaps they should issue basic income or increase their minimum wage.
lumberjack 10y ago
How much of that is just western stuff being manufactured there?
sulam 10y ago
This year's carbon isn't what's causing global warming. It would be interesting to sum all the anthropogenic carbon for the last 1000 years by source and see where it's coming from. Then we'd need to somehow work out what percentage of those totals were "consumed" locally vs exported. Europe and North America ("the west") would not come out well in this, though. This is a global problem, trying to scapegoat any one country is a really bad idea.
Brakenshire 10y ago
Considering that much of their population lives in poverty, I would say they have done an impressive amount. I can't imagine we would do as much if the shoe was on the other foot. The figures I've seen say they have greater levels of investment in green technologies than any other country (including the US). But, in any case, if we really wanted to do something about climate change, it wouldn't be difficult. The US is currently negotiating trade deals which would cover about two thirds of the global economy. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=SUM+GDP+Australia+Brunei+Canada+Chile+Japan+Malaysia+Mexico+New+Zealand+Peru+Singapore+United+States+Vietnam+EU https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=SUM+GDP+Australia+Brun... All they need to do is include a minimum carbon price, or a requirement to meet the Paris targets, in those deals. You don't need that much of a push for the weight of the global economy to drive forward the alternative technologies. It's not a question of who is going to take the most punishment, it's a question of applying the right pressure so that solar, electric vehicles, etc have the scale to become cheaper than current technologies. And if enough countries undertake that together, they will be leaders in those new industries.

by mesh 10y ago

cryptoz 10y ago

This is a world problem for sure. However, has the Chinese government or corporations spent billions on efforts to convince the population that climate change is a hoax? Anyone who runs a country that agrees it's a problem is doing better than a country (USA) where so many prominent people in power deny that the earth is changing because of us. That problem in particular seems unique to the west.

GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
Uh... despite that, US carbon emissions have dropped over 500 million metric tons from their peak levels. I don't see any movement in that direction from China and India. Actions speak louder than words, after all.
- themartorana 10y ago
  Is this mostly fuel efficiency in vehicles? I can't imagine solar is having that kind of impact yet, is it? (It would be great if it were.)
  - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
    No, it mainly has to do with the use of Natural Gas instead of coal for electricity generation
- danbruc 10y ago
  But the USA also has twice the carbon emission per capita of China and India's is almost ten times lower than that of the USA. Comparing carbon emissions but ignoring the differences in population is a bit misleading at the very least. You can really only start complaining about other countries when they pollute more than yourself.
  - sliverstorm 10y ago
    Direction is also important, not just per capita abv

komaromy 10y ago

The west (and the United States in particular) has had ample time and resources to do something about the problem, and failed to act meaningfully. China and India would have had to make much larger sacrifices in terms of individual quality of life to have the same impact.

bmmayer1 10y ago

That's completely unfair. China is a huge importer of CO2 emissions. Where do you think the dollars behind all those plastic toys and electric components come from? Statistics like these don't account for a countries carbon footprint relative to population; there's no way that Poland, with a GDP of $13k per capita, produces fewer CO2 emissions than South Africa with a GDP of $6k per capita. But it is likely that South Africa has more manufacturing and mining operations to support exports.

chronic80 10y ago
By your logic, we should in fact blame China for bringing upon themselves this burden by offering low manufacturing prices? Without low prices, "western" consumers would not create such demand. Climate change is absolutely the fault of China, India, Russia and others. Perhaps they should issue basic income or increase their minimum wage.

lumberjack 10y ago

How much of that is just western stuff being manufactured there?

sulam 10y ago

This year's carbon isn't what's causing global warming. It would be interesting to sum all the anthropogenic carbon for the last 1000 years by source and see where it's coming from. Then we'd need to somehow work out what percentage of those totals were "consumed" locally vs exported. Europe and North America ("the west") would not come out well in this, though. This is a global problem, trying to scapegoat any one country is a really bad idea.

Brakenshire 10y ago

Considering that much of their population lives in poverty, I would say they have done an impressive amount. I can't imagine we would do as much if the shoe was on the other foot. The figures I've seen say they have greater levels of investment in green technologies than any other country (including the US). But, in any case, if we really wanted to do something about climate change, it wouldn't be difficult. The US is currently negotiating trade deals which would cover about two thirds of the global economy. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=SUM+GDP+Australia+Brunei+Canada+Chile+Japan+Malaysia+Mexico+New+Zealand+Peru+Singapore+United+States+Vietnam+EU https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=SUM+GDP+Australia+Brun... All they need to do is include a minimum carbon price, or a requirement to meet the Paris targets, in those deals. You don't need that much of a push for the weight of the global economy to drive forward the alternative technologies. It's not a question of who is going to take the most punishment, it's a question of applying the right pressure so that solar, electric vehicles, etc have the scale to become cheaper than current technologies. And if enough countries undertake that together, they will be leaders in those new industries.