3 ms·

Good thing ! 60 % to go urgently. The US has the biggest responsability on this planet, being the largest rich country, having emitted more than twice the CO2

Good thing ! 60 % to go urgently. The US has the biggest responsability on this planet, being the largest rich country, having emitted more than twice the CO2 per capita of Europe in the recent decades. Can't expect pour countries to go quicker than the US.

Scarblac 3y ago
Much more than 60% to go, as all the non-electricity fossil fuel use (heating, transport, industry) will also need to be replaced by emissions free electric alternatives.
- jupp0r 3y ago
  It doesn't have to be electric, thermal is fine too where appropriate.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
    What is both thermal and appropriate?
    - rocqua 3y ago
      Solar water heaters. And district heating that uses waste heat. (E.g. waste heat from data centers or industrial processes). Besides that you could run smelting ovens, internal combustion engines, and other furnaces of hydrogen. Though that hydrogen will probably come from electricity if it isn't polluting.
      - jupp0r 3y ago
        Geothermal heating too.
  - Scarblac 3y ago
    Yes, but that doesn't really change my point much.
- Gibbon1 3y ago
  Yeah I roughly guesstimate we need about 4 to 5 times as much as we currently have installed. Bright side is the various technologies we need are developed and in production.
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  On the bright side, this makes intermediate progress simpler in some ways. You can replace say, gas powered heating with heat pumps and transfer the gas to storage for use in electric generators for when demand and supply diverge. These transitions can be done in parallel but once you hit a certain degree of carbon free electricity it makes sense to redirect focus to shift towards electrification as things that may have been borderline become viable.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ozr 3y ago
This is just wrong. Looking at 2016, the US isn't even in the top 10 per capita, and it's behind 4 EU states. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/ https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...

Scarblac 3y ago

Much more than 60% to go, as all the non-electricity fossil fuel use (heating, transport, industry) will also need to be replaced by emissions free electric alternatives.

jupp0r 3y ago
It doesn't have to be electric, thermal is fine too where appropriate.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
  What is both thermal and appropriate?
  - rocqua 3y ago
    Solar water heaters. And district heating that uses waste heat. (E.g. waste heat from data centers or industrial processes). Besides that you could run smelting ovens, internal combustion engines, and other furnaces of hydrogen. Though that hydrogen will probably come from electricity if it isn't polluting.
    - jupp0r 3y ago
      Geothermal heating too.
- Scarblac 3y ago
  Yes, but that doesn't really change my point much.
Gibbon1 3y ago
Yeah I roughly guesstimate we need about 4 to 5 times as much as we currently have installed. Bright side is the various technologies we need are developed and in production.
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
On the bright side, this makes intermediate progress simpler in some ways. You can replace say, gas powered heating with heat pumps and transfer the gas to storage for use in electric generators for when demand and supply diverge. These transitions can be done in parallel but once you hit a certain degree of carbon free electricity it makes sense to redirect focus to shift towards electrification as things that may have been borderline become viable.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ozr 3y ago

This is just wrong. Looking at 2016, the US isn't even in the top 10 per capita, and it's behind 4 EU states. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/ https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...