5 ms·

And where are those being built? Overwhelmingly in Asia and Africa

by nxm 4y ago

mitthrowaway2 4y ago
Plenty of projects in North America and Europe.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  The number of refineries, etc. in those places are only decreasing. Sure, there might be some additional projects but for the most part: no.
bradjohnson 4y ago
Not true, but don't let facts get in the way of your kneejerk racism. > The U.S. is leading in global LNG supply growth with an additional 5.9 million tonnes of capacity in 2022, for a total of 80 mtpa. > Norway saw the second-largest growth in LNG supply, with an additional 2.8 million tonnes of capacity. Malaysia and Qatar were close behind, with 2.4 million tonnes and 2.3 million tonnes of capacity growth in 2022, respectively.
runarberg 4y ago
First of all, you are wrong. There are new fossil fuel projects in North America and Europe as well (though Europe is building significantly less than North America). Second of all, why does that matter? Increased CO2 in the atmosphere will heat the climate everywhere (albeit not evenly). The fossil fuel market is global, meaning these projects are overwhelmingly built and profited by publicly traded international fossil fuel companies. (just like the rising temperature) The money to be made is distributed everywhere on the globe (albeit more in some areas than others), regardless of where these new projects are located. No, the climate disaster is a global crisis, and needs to be handled globally. If we were serious about minimizing the harm of climate change (and we should be; but we aren’t) than green infrastructure would be paid for by the wealthy countries even when it is rolled out in the poorer, where the rich countries won’t see any of the benefits (other then you know, saving the world from impeding doom).
nomel 4y ago
Reference?
ahelwer 4y ago
As I said, money talks. I'd like to share a chart I saw a couple months ago that stopped me dead in my tracks. It was in the Bloomberg NEF Energy Transition Investment Trends 2023 report, which you can get emailed to you by filling out a form here: https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/ https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/ Since that's a bit of trouble, I've clipped this incredible chart for you here: https://i.imgur.com/OlMAKVd.png https://i.imgur.com/OlMAKVd.png This single chart completely inverted how I think about this problem and the leadership of western countries in world affairs generally.
hackerlight 4y ago
And they still burn much less per-capita, so what's your point? Everyone should decarbonize quickly, but especially those wealthy countries that burn the most per-capita today, and who have burned the most historically and therefore benefited the most from the resulting wealth accumulation. And these wealthy countries should be sending truckloads of money to poor countries to help them with their decarbonization efforts, as recompense for their far outsized role in creating this problem to begin with.

And where are those being built? Overwhelmingly in Asia and Africa

by nxm 4y ago

And where are those being built? Overwhelmingly in Asia and Africa

mitthrowaway2 4y ago

Plenty of projects in North America and Europe.

whimsicalism 4y ago
The number of refineries, etc. in those places are only decreasing. Sure, there might be some additional projects but for the most part: no.

bradjohnson 4y ago

Not true, but don't let facts get in the way of your kneejerk racism. > The U.S. is leading in global LNG supply growth with an additional 5.9 million tonnes of capacity in 2022, for a total of 80 mtpa. > Norway saw the second-largest growth in LNG supply, with an additional 2.8 million tonnes of capacity. Malaysia and Qatar were close behind, with 2.4 million tonnes and 2.3 million tonnes of capacity growth in 2022, respectively.

runarberg 4y ago

First of all, you are wrong. There are new fossil fuel projects in North America and Europe as well (though Europe is building significantly less than North America). Second of all, why does that matter? Increased CO2 in the atmosphere will heat the climate everywhere (albeit not evenly). The fossil fuel market is global, meaning these projects are overwhelmingly built and profited by publicly traded international fossil fuel companies. (just like the rising temperature) The money to be made is distributed everywhere on the globe (albeit more in some areas than others), regardless of where these new projects are located. No, the climate disaster is a global crisis, and needs to be handled globally. If we were serious about minimizing the harm of climate change (and we should be; but we aren’t) than green infrastructure would be paid for by the wealthy countries even when it is rolled out in the poorer, where the rich countries won’t see any of the benefits (other then you know, saving the world from impeding doom).

nomel 4y ago

Reference?

ahelwer 4y ago

As I said, money talks. I'd like to share a chart I saw a couple months ago that stopped me dead in my tracks. It was in the Bloomberg NEF Energy Transition Investment Trends 2023 report, which you can get emailed to you by filling out a form here: https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/ https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/ Since that's a bit of trouble, I've clipped this incredible chart for you here: https://i.imgur.com/OlMAKVd.png https://i.imgur.com/OlMAKVd.png This single chart completely inverted how I think about this problem and the leadership of western countries in world affairs generally.

hackerlight 4y ago

And they still burn much less per-capita, so what's your point? Everyone should decarbonize quickly, but especially those wealthy countries that burn the most per-capita today, and who have burned the most historically and therefore benefited the most from the resulting wealth accumulation. And these wealthy countries should be sending truckloads of money to poor countries to help them with their decarbonization efforts, as recompense for their far outsized role in creating this problem to begin with.