7 ms·

> let's blame it all on other people Unfortunately we can't blame it on ourselves as our carbon emissions, assuming it's even relevant, have decreased massivel

> let's blame it all on other people Unfortunately we can't blame it on ourselves as our carbon emissions, assuming it's even relevant, have decreased massively compared to predictions.

haecceity 7y ago
Companies in developed countries have been exporting emissions to developing countries. Those companies are profiting while people like you and I point fingers at each other. Pretty funny. Anyway if you look at the emission metrics per capita it's still developed countries at the top.
- fierarul 7y ago
  ... but if developed countries are asking developing countries to reduce their emissions it means they are implicitly asking for a price raise too, no? So, why not do that?
  - haecceity 7y ago
    Not everyone can afford the price raise. Firms in developed countries would be hurt if consumption decreases due to the price raise so who’s going to support this policy?
    - fierarul 7y ago
      So could this really lead to a global depression? I doubt it.
      - haecceity 7y ago
        Not saying it could. I'm just discussing the incentives involved.
jlarocco 7y ago
You've got to be kidding... United States per-capita CO2 emmisions are 17.5 tons per year vs China's 6.18, and that's not even taking into account the fact that China emits a lot of CO2 producing cheap products to sell to the US. https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/ https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country...
- azinman2 7y ago
  I’m not arguing against US CO2, but the likelihood of those numbers for China being anywhere near accurate is small.
  - onion2k 7y ago
    Likewise for the US.
    - alxlaz 7y ago
      Why? They are supported by pretty much every source out there. See e.g. EDGAR ( https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9d09ccd1-e0dd-11e9-9c4e-01aa75ed71a1/language-en https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9d0... ), or this slightly older data set from the World Bank: https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=EN.ATM.CO2E.PC&country= https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=... . I'm not sure why you'd expect it to be otherwise. This is a per-capita figure, and carbon emissions are strongly correlated with income and purchasing power. CO2 emissions aren't driven by consumer goods production alone. There's an adjusted metric that puts things into an even better perspective: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions#consumption-based-trade-adjusted-co2-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emis... .
      - azinman2 7y ago
        So that last link has numbers drastically different from the GP’s data, and it says that it comes simply from fossil fuel combustion and cement — not population. Population is also not a great metric; the types of power plants, typical personal transportation usages, and transport of everyday items like food will vary greatly. These are also all very dynamic. The reality is all these data sources will he estimates. Estimates can be severely wrong — they can be produced by local governments with incentives to lie, or estimated by outside observers with poor actual knowledge. China has had a long history of empirical lying in their economic data locally due to internal party targets, for example. I see no reason for them to give accurate numbers to the UN/external world, where as with the US there’s enough decentralization and public data that there’s a better chance of being more accurate (but still probably quite off).

> let's blame it all on other people Unfortunately we can't blame it on ourselves as our carbon emissions, assuming it's even relevant, have decreased massively compared to predictions.

haecceity 7y ago

Companies in developed countries have been exporting emissions to developing countries. Those companies are profiting while people like you and I point fingers at each other. Pretty funny. Anyway if you look at the emission metrics per capita it's still developed countries at the top.

fierarul 7y ago
... but if developed countries are asking developing countries to reduce their emissions it means they are implicitly asking for a price raise too, no? So, why not do that?
- haecceity 7y ago
  Not everyone can afford the price raise. Firms in developed countries would be hurt if consumption decreases due to the price raise so who’s going to support this policy?
  - fierarul 7y ago
    So could this really lead to a global depression? I doubt it.
    - haecceity 7y ago
      Not saying it could. I'm just discussing the incentives involved.

jlarocco 7y ago

You've got to be kidding... United States per-capita CO2 emmisions are 17.5 tons per year vs China's 6.18, and that's not even taking into account the fact that China emits a lot of CO2 producing cheap products to sell to the US. https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/ https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country...

azinman2 7y ago
I’m not arguing against US CO2, but the likelihood of those numbers for China being anywhere near accurate is small.
- onion2k 7y ago
  Likewise for the US.
  - alxlaz 7y ago
    Why? They are supported by pretty much every source out there. See e.g. EDGAR ( https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9d09ccd1-e0dd-11e9-9c4e-01aa75ed71a1/language-en https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9d0... ), or this slightly older data set from the World Bank: https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=EN.ATM.CO2E.PC&country= https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=... . I'm not sure why you'd expect it to be otherwise. This is a per-capita figure, and carbon emissions are strongly correlated with income and purchasing power. CO2 emissions aren't driven by consumer goods production alone. There's an adjusted metric that puts things into an even better perspective: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions#consumption-based-trade-adjusted-co2-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emis... .
    - azinman2 7y ago
      So that last link has numbers drastically different from the GP’s data, and it says that it comes simply from fossil fuel combustion and cement — not population. Population is also not a great metric; the types of power plants, typical personal transportation usages, and transport of everyday items like food will vary greatly. These are also all very dynamic. The reality is all these data sources will he estimates. Estimates can be severely wrong — they can be produced by local governments with incentives to lie, or estimated by outside observers with poor actual knowledge. China has had a long history of empirical lying in their economic data locally due to internal party targets, for example. I see no reason for them to give accurate numbers to the UN/external world, where as with the US there’s enough decentralization and public data that there’s a better chance of being more accurate (but still probably quite off).