3 ms·

> The world’s governments might not coordinate to stop climate change. A bit frustrating to read coming from an American. Every government in the world is into

by Iv 7y ago

> The world’s governments might not coordinate to stop climate change. A bit frustrating to read coming from an American. Every government in the world is into it. Except America's. In the 90s climate change was concerning but everybody thought such an obviously international issue would create unanimity for collaboration, maybe with just some rogue nations disagreeing on the margin. It turned into a real scare when GWB came with cowboy boots and decided this was all an hoax and God promised coal for Americans. And despite this, OECD's emissions have plateaued and start decreasing: http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/OECD-v-NonOECD-CO2-Emissions-1965-through-2013.png http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/0... It may not be fast enough but the direction is correct. Governments ARE coordinating. And this graph is from 2013. China, who is the biggest non-OECD emittor is now plateauing as well: https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/amp_full_width_600/public/ChinaEnergyEmissionsChart529px.png https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/amp... I know Americans love to dismiss the idea that governments may be competent at something, but so far, with the exception of theirs, governments of the world have coordinated far better than, say, corporate interests have in order to save climate.

barry-cotter 7y ago
>> The world’s governments might not coordinate to stop climate change. > A bit frustrating to read coming from an American. Every government in the world is into it. Except America's. Yeah, India, Pakistan, China, Indonesia, they’re going to tell their citizens that they’re sorry but they’ll never have cars, meat on the table every day or an international vacation every two years. Their consumption must be held to 1950s US prosperity for climate change, where the middle class worried about the price of basic food stuffs. There will be no political solutions to climate change, only technological ones. The clearest example is carbon taxes, they fail to pass or are repealed in Australia, Canada, Washington, France. “We’re going to make you poorer, for the environment!” is not a vote winner.
- SECProto 7y ago
  > There will be no political solutions to climate change, only technological ones. The clearest example is carbon taxes, they fail to pass or are repealed in Australia, Canada, Washington, France. This is flat-out wrong in the case of Canada. Carbon taxes exist in 6 provinces of Canada currently (one by choice, 5 provinces had a federal carbon tax imposed as they did not have provincial legislation with comparable effect). Two provinces challenged the tax in court and lost. In the case of British Columbia, their carbon tax was by choice, and their economy has grown (faster than Canada) while their emissions dropped [1]. Carbon taxes are a political solution that works. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_carbon_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_carbon_tax
- Iv 7y ago
  In western nations there seems to be a consensus into thinking that CO2 and GDP are bolted together and that industries can't become more efficient. Interestingly, that is totally and utterly wrong. Since the 90, we emit about 50% less CO2 per dollar of GDP produced (PPP, so inflation-adjusted): https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PP.GD https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PP.GD Chinese citizens have cars, but they pay extra if it is not electric. Go visit Shenzhen one day to see the result: all the cheap vehicles are electric-powered tricyle, bikes or small truck. The technological solution is there. It is a combination of clean energy (which includes nuclear, something that needs to be hammered on) and electric vehicles. We have these solutions now. The reason why it is not adopted worldwide is political. And countries like China who subsidize EV and tax thermal vehicles are showing the way. Seriously: look at the energy mix of France, look at how fast their electrical production became mostly nuclear and produced very low emissions. The whole world needs to make a similar nuclear plant production run and switch to electric vehicles. There is nothing to solve in terms of technology, We'll make the batteries a bit better, a bit cheaper but even that would be totally unnecessary with a strong political will.
bamboozled 7y ago
Australia is probably doing the least and if anything, promoting the use of fossil fuel to support its flawed, coal export dependent economy.
chillacy 7y ago
It’s going to be hard. Game theory would suggest that governments will defect and do what’s best individually. So developing countries are going to burn coal to develop, after all they have the most to gain and the least to lose relative to developed countries.

by Iv 7y ago

barry-cotter 7y ago

>> The world’s governments might not coordinate to stop climate change. > A bit frustrating to read coming from an American. Every government in the world is into it. Except America's. Yeah, India, Pakistan, China, Indonesia, they’re going to tell their citizens that they’re sorry but they’ll never have cars, meat on the table every day or an international vacation every two years. Their consumption must be held to 1950s US prosperity for climate change, where the middle class worried about the price of basic food stuffs. There will be no political solutions to climate change, only technological ones. The clearest example is carbon taxes, they fail to pass or are repealed in Australia, Canada, Washington, France. “We’re going to make you poorer, for the environment!” is not a vote winner.

SECProto 7y ago
> There will be no political solutions to climate change, only technological ones. The clearest example is carbon taxes, they fail to pass or are repealed in Australia, Canada, Washington, France. This is flat-out wrong in the case of Canada. Carbon taxes exist in 6 provinces of Canada currently (one by choice, 5 provinces had a federal carbon tax imposed as they did not have provincial legislation with comparable effect). Two provinces challenged the tax in court and lost. In the case of British Columbia, their carbon tax was by choice, and their economy has grown (faster than Canada) while their emissions dropped [1]. Carbon taxes are a political solution that works. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_carbon_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_carbon_tax
Iv 7y ago
In western nations there seems to be a consensus into thinking that CO2 and GDP are bolted together and that industries can't become more efficient. Interestingly, that is totally and utterly wrong. Since the 90, we emit about 50% less CO2 per dollar of GDP produced (PPP, so inflation-adjusted): https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PP.GD https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PP.GD Chinese citizens have cars, but they pay extra if it is not electric. Go visit Shenzhen one day to see the result: all the cheap vehicles are electric-powered tricyle, bikes or small truck. The technological solution is there. It is a combination of clean energy (which includes nuclear, something that needs to be hammered on) and electric vehicles. We have these solutions now. The reason why it is not adopted worldwide is political. And countries like China who subsidize EV and tax thermal vehicles are showing the way. Seriously: look at the energy mix of France, look at how fast their electrical production became mostly nuclear and produced very low emissions. The whole world needs to make a similar nuclear plant production run and switch to electric vehicles. There is nothing to solve in terms of technology, We'll make the batteries a bit better, a bit cheaper but even that would be totally unnecessary with a strong political will.

bamboozled 7y ago

Australia is probably doing the least and if anything, promoting the use of fossil fuel to support its flawed, coal export dependent economy.

chillacy 7y ago

It’s going to be hard. Game theory would suggest that governments will defect and do what’s best individually. So developing countries are going to burn coal to develop, after all they have the most to gain and the least to lose relative to developed countries.