4 ms·

Maybe more carrot than stick makes sense here as law enforcement doesn't really work for an authoritarian state. If there was enough financial incentive to low

Maybe more carrot than stick makes sense here as law enforcement doesn't really work for an authoritarian state. If there was enough financial incentive to lower emissions and keep them lower, I'm sure the Turkmenistan government would. Unfortunately (according to TFA) they are more allied to Russia and China which take a hands-off approach at best.

DrScientist 3y ago
I wonder which country has the most emissions? ( China followed by US, and India ). If you adjust by per capita - then all the energy producing countries are top - but then they are emitting for other people - Turkmenistan isn't producing all that energy for domestic consumption. Easy to point fingers. It's the consumers, not the producers per se that are the problem.
- kashunstva 3y ago
  > Turkmenistan isn't producing all that energy for domestic consumption > It's the consumers, not the producers per se that are the problem. Irrespective of which party is the proximate cause of energy extraction in Turkmenistan, the large volume leakage of methane according to the article is not an inevitable byproduct of oil drilling. What’s more, the incremental costs of controlling methane emissions are tiny. And finally, consumers couldn’t go re-light methane flares at the drill sites even if they wanted to.
  - red-iron-pine 3y ago
    In other words, Turkmen Oil is fucking up and not doing basic methane leak management. All of the discussions around who is a larger consumer are pointless; the point is that they could be doing more, and at a very small cost to them directly.
- RobotToaster 3y ago
  >If you adjust by per capita - then all the energy producing countries are top If you use consumption based accounting, Luxembourg comes out number 1, apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita#Consumption-based_emissions:_annual_carbon_dioxide_emissions_in_metric_tons_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
  - h0l0cube 3y ago
    Our World in Data have an interactive map of it https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-emissions
parineum 3y ago
> Unfortunately (according to TFA) they are more allied to Russia and China which take a hands-off approach at best. I get what you're saying here, something like, "we couldn't change it if we tried" but we wouldn't even if we could. We're fighting a proxy war with Russia right now over access to fossil fuel right now. Releasing tons and tons of CO2 for the right to release more CO2 in the future.
- misja111 3y ago
  From a purely Russian-centric point of view, is global warming even a bad thing? Russia has huge stretches of land that are mostly useless for farming because of the cold. Not to mention the Arctic region, which they could traverse by ship if most of the ice would be molten.
  - h0l0cube 3y ago
    I almost mentioned that. Russia are possibly worse than ‘hands off’ when it comes to encouraging global warming Edit: probably changed to possibly. Downvoted immediately because who knows?
  - jemmyw 3y ago
    As I understand it that land won't become arable.
    - h0l0cube 3y ago
      What’s your understanding based on?
      - jemmyw 3y ago
        https://www.climatechangepost.com/russia/agriculture-and-horticulture/ https://www.climatechangepost.com/russia/agriculture-and-hor... Sounds complex. There are open questions as to whether those regions that open up for farming would have the soil to support it. And whether reduction in rainfall elsewhere in Russia would cancel out the gains. They have already benefited from current warming.

DrScientist 3y ago

I wonder which country has the most emissions? ( China followed by US, and India ). If you adjust by per capita - then all the energy producing countries are top - but then they are emitting for other people - Turkmenistan isn't producing all that energy for domestic consumption. Easy to point fingers. It's the consumers, not the producers per se that are the problem.

kashunstva 3y ago
> Turkmenistan isn't producing all that energy for domestic consumption > It's the consumers, not the producers per se that are the problem. Irrespective of which party is the proximate cause of energy extraction in Turkmenistan, the large volume leakage of methane according to the article is not an inevitable byproduct of oil drilling. What’s more, the incremental costs of controlling methane emissions are tiny. And finally, consumers couldn’t go re-light methane flares at the drill sites even if they wanted to.
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  In other words, Turkmen Oil is fucking up and not doing basic methane leak management. All of the discussions around who is a larger consumer are pointless; the point is that they could be doing more, and at a very small cost to them directly.
RobotToaster 3y ago
>If you adjust by per capita - then all the energy producing countries are top If you use consumption based accounting, Luxembourg comes out number 1, apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita#Consumption-based_emissions:_annual_carbon_dioxide_emissions_in_metric_tons_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
- h0l0cube 3y ago
  Our World in Data have an interactive map of it https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-emissions

parineum 3y ago

> Unfortunately (according to TFA) they are more allied to Russia and China which take a hands-off approach at best. I get what you're saying here, something like, "we couldn't change it if we tried" but we wouldn't even if we could. We're fighting a proxy war with Russia right now over access to fossil fuel right now. Releasing tons and tons of CO2 for the right to release more CO2 in the future.

misja111 3y ago
From a purely Russian-centric point of view, is global warming even a bad thing? Russia has huge stretches of land that are mostly useless for farming because of the cold. Not to mention the Arctic region, which they could traverse by ship if most of the ice would be molten.
- h0l0cube 3y ago
  I almost mentioned that. Russia are possibly worse than ‘hands off’ when it comes to encouraging global warming Edit: probably changed to possibly. Downvoted immediately because who knows?
- jemmyw 3y ago
  As I understand it that land won't become arable.
  - h0l0cube 3y ago
    What’s your understanding based on?
    - jemmyw 3y ago
      https://www.climatechangepost.com/russia/agriculture-and-horticulture/ https://www.climatechangepost.com/russia/agriculture-and-hor... Sounds complex. There are open questions as to whether those regions that open up for farming would have the soil to support it. And whether reduction in rainfall elsewhere in Russia would cancel out the gains. They have already benefited from current warming.