4 ms·
Funny that the article doesn't mention the word "export" once. As is always the case with green energy, local changes don't matter if you're shipping the CO2 e
by PheonixPharts 4y ago
Funny that the article doesn't mention the word "export" once.
As is always the case with green energy, local changes don't matter if you're shipping the CO2 emissions somewhere else.
Interestingly enough Australia's coal export are at their lowest in 7 years, but this is mostly because coal companies have been able to maintain very high profits selling less as the price of coal has been high (because there is a lot of global demand) [0].
The real question is, as always with fossil fuels, how much of your proven reserves do you plan to keep in the ground? The only way (outside of sequestration fantasies) to keep CO2 out of the air is to keep it in the ground. But I don't know of any examples where plans for future extraction have been shuttered.
0. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/15/australias-coal-exporters-made-windfall-profit-of-45bn-last-year-report-estimates https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/15/australi...
- wilg 4y agoAustralia's CO2 emissions are down when accounting for trade. https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/australia https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/australia
- marvin 4y agoSimilar is true for practically all countries that have reduced their CO2 emissions. Can’t be bothered to dig up a source, but probably yours also links this data. Exported CO2 emissions negating improvement is a myth, or disinformation.
- wilg 4y agoThat's my assessment also.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]