3 ms·

I used to think this, but if you look at the history of environmentalism, many unprofitable changes have been made (e.g. CFC production reduced, leaded gasoline

I used to think this, but if you look at the history of environmentalism, many unprofitable changes have been made (e.g. CFC production reduced, leaded gasoline replaced) This is a dangerous idea to spread, because if you truly believe it then the only solution is dismantle capitalism. The irony is that regulated capitalism in the West has been the most effective at reducing emissions. The places with the worst emissions have the same economic incentives, but different policy (such as China).

gonzo41 3y ago
There were less crazy people back then. Or more to the point, they didn't have internet connections and could bully and hector elected officials and scientists and thus stall progress in those space. Things are different now.
drekk 3y ago
How do you figure China is an exemplar for worst emissions? They emit less per capita than the US today as well as historically. They are investing $450 billion over the next 15 years to build 150 new nuclear reactors, more than the rest of the world has built combined over the past 35 years. They're a leader in solar and are learning from the recent hydropower shortages they experienced [0]. [0] https://www.chinawaterrisk.org/opinions/what-lessons-do-the-chinese-hydropower-shortages-in-summer-2022-hold-for-the-world/ https://www.chinawaterrisk.org/opinions/what-lessons-do-the-...
- brutusborn 3y ago
  The relative rate of emissions reduction: Chinas emissions accelerate while the wests plateaus. The Chinese don’t emit less because they are good global citizens, it is because they are less wealthy. If emissions per capita is our judge, we should be congratulating all the countries in the worst poverty, since they use the least amount of energy.
- blackbear_ 3y ago
  > How do you figure China is an exemplar for worst emissions? They emit less per capita than the US today as well as historically. But the Chinese are also poorer, on average, and since poorer people tend to live a simpler life (not that it is a bad thing), emission per capita may not be a good indicator. An alternative is to compare tons of CO2 emitted for each USD of GDP produced, which, using the numbers the world bank [1], turns out to be 0.6 for China and 0.2 for the US (using figures from 2021 for GDP and population, and 2019 for emissions, but the results hold qualitatively). Roughly speaking, this means that the same good/service required, on average, three times as much CO2 to be produced/offered in China compared to the US (using USD to measure the "quantity" of goods/services). [1] https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=US-CN https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=US-CN
jeroenhd 3y ago
Change is definitely possible, but unlike with CFCs some very rich, powerful, influential people are meddling with the affairs of every government around the world. Reducing CO2 is affecting the bottom line of some very important people and that's what will cripple many countries more than any real economic ideals. China's emissions aren't even all that high when you take into account their absolutely massive population. Oil states, tiny states, and western(ised) states are still the top polluters. Per capita, China is about on par with north-western European countries. The average person in China emits between half to two thirds of the carbon emissions the average American citizen emits, and countries like Canada and Australia carbon footprints similar to the USA. The Chinese carbon emission reduction industry has been so effective that their solar panels had to be taxed extra or even banned from import into the EU because their cheap solar power was killing the European industry and creating an economic dependence on China. While the west is working hard on reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, upcoming economies like China and India need to deal with prevention as much as reduction. Frankly, it's amazing how much these economies have managed to limit their carbon footprint despite their massive population and rapidly increasing wealth.
- brutusborn 3y ago
  CO2 is harder to limit than CFCs, but my point is that there are existence proofs that policy can trump economics. I agree the West is higher on a per capita basis, but the important measure is the change. The West is cutting emissions per person, and China is increasing them. It’s significant that China is mostly selling their panels to the West. If they are such world leaders, why do they continue to accelerate coal and gas generation? If they have the cheapest panels, why don’t they just use those? Because their policy is to maximise economic power and practically ignore emissions. Unless the west finds a way to incentivise reductions in the east and developing world (eg green investment, tariffs based on emissions), our sacrifices will have been in vain.

gonzo41 3y ago

There were less crazy people back then. Or more to the point, they didn't have internet connections and could bully and hector elected officials and scientists and thus stall progress in those space. Things are different now.

drekk 3y ago

How do you figure China is an exemplar for worst emissions? They emit less per capita than the US today as well as historically. They are investing $450 billion over the next 15 years to build 150 new nuclear reactors, more than the rest of the world has built combined over the past 35 years. They're a leader in solar and are learning from the recent hydropower shortages they experienced [0]. [0] https://www.chinawaterrisk.org/opinions/what-lessons-do-the-chinese-hydropower-shortages-in-summer-2022-hold-for-the-world/ https://www.chinawaterrisk.org/opinions/what-lessons-do-the-...

brutusborn 3y ago
The relative rate of emissions reduction: Chinas emissions accelerate while the wests plateaus. The Chinese don’t emit less because they are good global citizens, it is because they are less wealthy. If emissions per capita is our judge, we should be congratulating all the countries in the worst poverty, since they use the least amount of energy.
blackbear_ 3y ago
> How do you figure China is an exemplar for worst emissions? They emit less per capita than the US today as well as historically. But the Chinese are also poorer, on average, and since poorer people tend to live a simpler life (not that it is a bad thing), emission per capita may not be a good indicator. An alternative is to compare tons of CO2 emitted for each USD of GDP produced, which, using the numbers the world bank [1], turns out to be 0.6 for China and 0.2 for the US (using figures from 2021 for GDP and population, and 2019 for emissions, but the results hold qualitatively). Roughly speaking, this means that the same good/service required, on average, three times as much CO2 to be produced/offered in China compared to the US (using USD to measure the "quantity" of goods/services). [1] https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=US-CN https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=US-CN

jeroenhd 3y ago

Change is definitely possible, but unlike with CFCs some very rich, powerful, influential people are meddling with the affairs of every government around the world. Reducing CO2 is affecting the bottom line of some very important people and that's what will cripple many countries more than any real economic ideals. China's emissions aren't even all that high when you take into account their absolutely massive population. Oil states, tiny states, and western(ised) states are still the top polluters. Per capita, China is about on par with north-western European countries. The average person in China emits between half to two thirds of the carbon emissions the average American citizen emits, and countries like Canada and Australia carbon footprints similar to the USA. The Chinese carbon emission reduction industry has been so effective that their solar panels had to be taxed extra or even banned from import into the EU because their cheap solar power was killing the European industry and creating an economic dependence on China. While the west is working hard on reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, upcoming economies like China and India need to deal with prevention as much as reduction. Frankly, it's amazing how much these economies have managed to limit their carbon footprint despite their massive population and rapidly increasing wealth.

brutusborn 3y ago
CO2 is harder to limit than CFCs, but my point is that there are existence proofs that policy can trump economics. I agree the West is higher on a per capita basis, but the important measure is the change. The West is cutting emissions per person, and China is increasing them. It’s significant that China is mostly selling their panels to the West. If they are such world leaders, why do they continue to accelerate coal and gas generation? If they have the cheapest panels, why don’t they just use those? Because their policy is to maximise economic power and practically ignore emissions. Unless the west finds a way to incentivise reductions in the east and developing world (eg green investment, tariffs based on emissions), our sacrifices will have been in vain.