4 ms·

Legitimate question: How can US measures stop climate change if many other countries are planning to construct and operate hundreds of coal plants for electric

Legitimate question: How can US measures stop climate change if many other countries are planning to construct and operate hundreds of coal plants for electric generation?

dataflow 4y ago
In theory at least it might develop new technologies that might change the direction other countries want to go, too. In practice I'm not sure how anyone is going to make a dent without switching to nuclear power.
etchalon 4y ago
We can offset the efforts of other countries.
- cm2187 4y ago
  Not by much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions#/media/File:Carbon_dioxide_emissions-01.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  That's never gonna work. If we figure out how to get to net zero electricity then we have to put pressure on other countries to do the same and show them how or it won't happen. It's possible China will surpass us in 10 or 20 years though and make that irrelevant.
throwaway5752 4y ago
The US can reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions, which are substantial. Then it can develop and sell renewable generation technology to the rest of the world. The US has extraordinary scientific, engineering, and manufacturing talent and can do it.
- uejfiweun 4y ago
  I'd certainly love to believe this, but it has most definitely not materialized yet. I'm not sure that self-inflicting economic pain in order to incentivize development of alternative fuels is a good strategy.
  - throwaway5752 4y ago
    To me this is like arguing about getting the rabies vaccine after a bite from a wild animal. It's not going to be pleasant, but it's the path of the least pain, substantially. There will be economic pain one way or another, it's a question of if the planet habitable in the way we've adapted, also.
polski-g 4y ago
It could declare war and destroy them and then mandate whatever it wants in the peace deal.
vkou 4y ago
Simple. Tax carbon and tariff countries that don't. If you want to be really self-serving and hypocritical about this sort of thing, you can even skip out on doing the first part, and jump straight to the second.
epistasis 4y ago
The US taking action puts international pressure on other nations to also take action. If the US ignored it and does not take action, other countries are less likely to take action, because the U.S. is generally a leader on these things. It's kind of like asking "If the US stops pooping in the pool, what's to stop another kid from pooping in the pool?" Well those other kids are a hell of a lot more likely to poop in the pool if they see an international leader doing it. Also, by leading the way and showing how decerbonization is not only cheaper, but also healthier, other countries will be more likely to try to save money similarly. Most places that are installing coal these days are doing it because of local corruption. It's a lot easier to grift off a huge project than it is off of small distributed energy. Seeing that the US is moving away from coal will mean that corrupt local officials will have less excuse to pick outdated technology that lets them get bribed.
- mlindner 4y ago
  The US has been trending downward in emissions for some time now without the federal government having to mandate anything. Texas of all places is one of the fastest growing locations in the country for wind energy.
  - epistasis 4y ago
    Exactly, decarbonization will save us tons of money as individuals and as a society. The probe is that many monied interests don't want to change their businesses to adapt. This is a separate issue from federal action. We take all sorts of actions with vast political and economic action that don't save money, to reduce pollution. But by leading the way, we will encourage other countries to not build coal plants, which was the "legitimate" question that was asked.
  - redisman 4y ago
    Is it fast enough to stop a huge economic and biological burden hitting our children? It’s sad how short sighted the majority of people in the US is today. Small sacrifices could lead to hugely greater quality of life for everyone’s grand children but everyone is special and deserve everything they desire right now.
asdff 4y ago
This is the same U.S. government that got the entire earth to adopt their drug scheduling policies and to buy all oil with their dollar, keep in mind. This country is capable of exerting immense diplomatic pressure.
stjohnswarts 4y ago
It has to start somewhere, and we are the richest country in the world currently.

Legitimate question: How can US measures stop climate change if many other countries are planning to construct and operate hundreds of coal plants for electric generation?

dataflow 4y ago

In theory at least it might develop new technologies that might change the direction other countries want to go, too. In practice I'm not sure how anyone is going to make a dent without switching to nuclear power.

etchalon 4y ago

We can offset the efforts of other countries.

cm2187 4y ago
Not by much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions#/media/File:Carbon_dioxide_emissions-01.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
stjohnswarts 4y ago
That's never gonna work. If we figure out how to get to net zero electricity then we have to put pressure on other countries to do the same and show them how or it won't happen. It's possible China will surpass us in 10 or 20 years though and make that irrelevant.

throwaway5752 4y ago

The US can reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions, which are substantial. Then it can develop and sell renewable generation technology to the rest of the world. The US has extraordinary scientific, engineering, and manufacturing talent and can do it.

uejfiweun 4y ago
I'd certainly love to believe this, but it has most definitely not materialized yet. I'm not sure that self-inflicting economic pain in order to incentivize development of alternative fuels is a good strategy.
- throwaway5752 4y ago
  To me this is like arguing about getting the rabies vaccine after a bite from a wild animal. It's not going to be pleasant, but it's the path of the least pain, substantially. There will be economic pain one way or another, it's a question of if the planet habitable in the way we've adapted, also.

polski-g 4y ago

It could declare war and destroy them and then mandate whatever it wants in the peace deal.

vkou 4y ago

Simple. Tax carbon and tariff countries that don't. If you want to be really self-serving and hypocritical about this sort of thing, you can even skip out on doing the first part, and jump straight to the second.

epistasis 4y ago

The US taking action puts international pressure on other nations to also take action. If the US ignored it and does not take action, other countries are less likely to take action, because the U.S. is generally a leader on these things. It's kind of like asking "If the US stops pooping in the pool, what's to stop another kid from pooping in the pool?" Well those other kids are a hell of a lot more likely to poop in the pool if they see an international leader doing it. Also, by leading the way and showing how decerbonization is not only cheaper, but also healthier, other countries will be more likely to try to save money similarly. Most places that are installing coal these days are doing it because of local corruption. It's a lot easier to grift off a huge project than it is off of small distributed energy. Seeing that the US is moving away from coal will mean that corrupt local officials will have less excuse to pick outdated technology that lets them get bribed.

mlindner 4y ago
The US has been trending downward in emissions for some time now without the federal government having to mandate anything. Texas of all places is one of the fastest growing locations in the country for wind energy.
- epistasis 4y ago
  Exactly, decarbonization will save us tons of money as individuals and as a society. The probe is that many monied interests don't want to change their businesses to adapt. This is a separate issue from federal action. We take all sorts of actions with vast political and economic action that don't save money, to reduce pollution. But by leading the way, we will encourage other countries to not build coal plants, which was the "legitimate" question that was asked.
- redisman 4y ago
  Is it fast enough to stop a huge economic and biological burden hitting our children? It’s sad how short sighted the majority of people in the US is today. Small sacrifices could lead to hugely greater quality of life for everyone’s grand children but everyone is special and deserve everything they desire right now.

asdff 4y ago

This is the same U.S. government that got the entire earth to adopt their drug scheduling policies and to buy all oil with their dollar, keep in mind. This country is capable of exerting immense diplomatic pressure.

stjohnswarts 4y ago

It has to start somewhere, and we are the richest country in the world currently.