5 ms·

> 9. Global carbon emissions are not reduced, mostly because of lack of initiative by China and 3rd world countries. Per capita, it's not the "3rd" world count

> 9. Global carbon emissions are not reduced, mostly because of lack of initiative by China and 3rd world countries. Per capita, it's not the "3rd" world countries that are polluting, but the "1st" worlds (https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/ https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country...). I'm sad to see someone still referring to countries as "1st" and "3rd" world, as that's an incredibly outdated term. Also to refer to China as a "3rd world country" is astonishing. I recommend you read the book Factfulness (https://www.gapminder.org/factfulness-book/ https://www.gapminder.org/factfulness-book/) to get a better sense in how the world works.

brd 7y ago
China is 2x the emitter that the US is and it's going to get worse. China has more than doubled their per capita emissions in the last 20 years. Many other countries will follow suit. The US and other more developed economies are plateauing in terms of emissions per capita. While there's ample opportunity to begin to claw back those numbers, it is not where the problem lies moving forward.
- cuchoi 7y ago
  China: 6.4 metric tons of CO2 per capita United States: 16.5 metric tons of CO2 per capita -- Other developed countries: Germany: 8.9 metric tons of CO2 per capita France: 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per capita UK: 6.5 metric tons of CO2 per capita Spain: 5 metric tons of CO2 per capita -- This is 2014 data (for comparability), but in 2018 China still had half (7.95 metric tons per capita) the CO2 per capita than the US
vorpalhex 7y ago
> Also to refer to China as a "3rd world country" is astonishing > by China and 3rd world countries By Mary and the guys (indicating that Mary is not a guy). > Per capita, it's not the "3rd" world countries that are polluting, but the "1st" worlds From your own source, the top polluters per capita are Qatar, Trinidad & Tobago and Kuwait. Qatar is wealthy, but probably not "1st world". > I'm sad to see someone still referring to countries as "1st" and "3rd" world, as that's an incredibly outdated term The AP standard was updated in 2015. The terms "1st", "2nd" and "3rd" world are still in common parlance even though the AP prefers "Developed" and "Developing".
- callaars 7y ago
  Show me the AP standard, please, because other sources seem to vehemently disagree with your statement. Unless you are still in the cold war, that is. I reiterate what I said before, please read Factfulness, and then get back to me. Also, funnily enough, China was never considered a third-world country, but a second-world one, you know, in Cold war terms.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    > Also, funnily enough, China was never considered a third-world country, but a second-world one, you know, in Cold war terms. Again you're really struggling with the grammar here. "Mary and the boys". Is Mary a boy? No, Mary is not a boy. We are indicating Mary is in fact, not part of "the boys". Likewise, "China and 3rd world" indicates China is not 3rd world. > Show me the AP standard https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/631085111220547584?lang=en https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/631085111220547584?la... https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/372684438/if-you-shouldnt-call-it-the-third-world-what-should-you-call-it https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/3726844... > I reiterate what I said before, please read Factfulness, and then get back to me. Wonderful book, not related to our current disagreement. If we're throwing out recommendations though, then I'd recommend Strunk and White.

brd 7y ago

China is 2x the emitter that the US is and it's going to get worse. China has more than doubled their per capita emissions in the last 20 years. Many other countries will follow suit. The US and other more developed economies are plateauing in terms of emissions per capita. While there's ample opportunity to begin to claw back those numbers, it is not where the problem lies moving forward.

cuchoi 7y ago
China: 6.4 metric tons of CO2 per capita United States: 16.5 metric tons of CO2 per capita -- Other developed countries: Germany: 8.9 metric tons of CO2 per capita France: 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per capita UK: 6.5 metric tons of CO2 per capita Spain: 5 metric tons of CO2 per capita -- This is 2014 data (for comparability), but in 2018 China still had half (7.95 metric tons per capita) the CO2 per capita than the US

vorpalhex 7y ago

> Also to refer to China as a "3rd world country" is astonishing > by China and 3rd world countries By Mary and the guys (indicating that Mary is not a guy). > Per capita, it's not the "3rd" world countries that are polluting, but the "1st" worlds From your own source, the top polluters per capita are Qatar, Trinidad & Tobago and Kuwait. Qatar is wealthy, but probably not "1st world". > I'm sad to see someone still referring to countries as "1st" and "3rd" world, as that's an incredibly outdated term The AP standard was updated in 2015. The terms "1st", "2nd" and "3rd" world are still in common parlance even though the AP prefers "Developed" and "Developing".

callaars 7y ago
Show me the AP standard, please, because other sources seem to vehemently disagree with your statement. Unless you are still in the cold war, that is. I reiterate what I said before, please read Factfulness, and then get back to me. Also, funnily enough, China was never considered a third-world country, but a second-world one, you know, in Cold war terms.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  > Also, funnily enough, China was never considered a third-world country, but a second-world one, you know, in Cold war terms. Again you're really struggling with the grammar here. "Mary and the boys". Is Mary a boy? No, Mary is not a boy. We are indicating Mary is in fact, not part of "the boys". Likewise, "China and 3rd world" indicates China is not 3rd world. > Show me the AP standard https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/631085111220547584?lang=en https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/631085111220547584?la... https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/372684438/if-you-shouldnt-call-it-the-third-world-what-should-you-call-it https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/3726844... > I reiterate what I said before, please read Factfulness, and then get back to me. Wonderful book, not related to our current disagreement. If we're throwing out recommendations though, then I'd recommend Strunk and White.