2 ms·

The US led the world in emission reductions in 2018, meanwhile the EU, Canada, India, and China increased their production significantly. Yet the US gets slamme

The US led the world in emission reductions in 2018, meanwhile the EU, Canada, India, and China increased their production significantly. Yet the US gets slammed by the global community https://imgur.com/a/sNWFP3k https://imgur.com/a/sNWFP3k

emj 8y ago
Growing is easy when you start from zero, and reducing is easy when you can easily move your production elsewhere. BP statistical review probably have their numbers right, I'm more concern about the message they want to spread. (I do not say that EU/China should be able to increase their emissions, just that the US is not decreasing its consumption therefore it is impossible to decrease emission)
usaar333 8y ago
Because the US is so high absolutely. Should it get an award just because natural gas got cheaper than coal?
- yostrovs 8y ago
  Yes it should. It made it happen because instead of having endless meetings and brainstorming sessions in Lesbos or Johannesburg, the heartless ignoramuses of Texas figured out how to drill for clean energy. What really did the brainstormes accomplish considering the chart presented?
  - lugg 8y ago
    You think fracking is clean? You think the "brainstorming sessions" accomplished nothing because of cherry picked single year data on Imgur? Yikes.
- specialist 8y ago
  Absolutely not. One useful rhetorical side effect is breaking the narrative linking GDP with petrol consumption. Opening people's mind's to the possibility that conservation and switching to renewable won't crater the economy. Perceptions matter.
lugg 8y ago
The USA with 4% of the world's population is responsible for over a third of the greenhouse gases unnaturally released. You better believe the global community will slam the USA for their emissions. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/01/climate/us-biggest-carbon-polluter-in-history-will-it-walk-away-from-the-paris-climate-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/01/climate/us-bi... Other countries have their issues and NOBODY is defending them here. So I'm not sure what you're getting at with the rest of that statement.

emj 8y ago

Growing is easy when you start from zero, and reducing is easy when you can easily move your production elsewhere. BP statistical review probably have their numbers right, I'm more concern about the message they want to spread. (I do not say that EU/China should be able to increase their emissions, just that the US is not decreasing its consumption therefore it is impossible to decrease emission)

usaar333 8y ago

Because the US is so high absolutely. Should it get an award just because natural gas got cheaper than coal?

yostrovs 8y ago
Yes it should. It made it happen because instead of having endless meetings and brainstorming sessions in Lesbos or Johannesburg, the heartless ignoramuses of Texas figured out how to drill for clean energy. What really did the brainstormes accomplish considering the chart presented?
- lugg 8y ago
  You think fracking is clean? You think the "brainstorming sessions" accomplished nothing because of cherry picked single year data on Imgur? Yikes.
specialist 8y ago
Absolutely not. One useful rhetorical side effect is breaking the narrative linking GDP with petrol consumption. Opening people's mind's to the possibility that conservation and switching to renewable won't crater the economy. Perceptions matter.

lugg 8y ago

The USA with 4% of the world's population is responsible for over a third of the greenhouse gases unnaturally released. You better believe the global community will slam the USA for their emissions. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/01/climate/us-biggest-carbon-polluter-in-history-will-it-walk-away-from-the-paris-climate-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/01/climate/us-bi... Other countries have their issues and NOBODY is defending them here. So I'm not sure what you're getting at with the rest of that statement.