3 ms·

> could have been outsourcing to China since 2000? No need to guess. You can actually look at what was imported and exported and it’s nowhere close to making u

by Retric 3y ago

> could have been outsourcing to China since 2000? No need to guess. You can actually look at what was imported and exported and it’s nowhere close to making up that gap. 2.2 Billion tons / year isn’t difficult to track down. > I would argue that it is not being actively addressed at all. Coal is dying, oil and natural gas aren’t nearly as plentiful. Even if you assume we’re going to extract all the oil and natural gas that exists the worst case is net zero by 2100, with better options leaving more carbon in the ground. As 2 °C means ~620 ppm that’s seemingly already off the table which wasn’t guaranteed 20 years ago.

palata 3y ago
> You can actually look at what was imported and exported You will have to elaborate on that. Do you mean that somewhere, online, are listed all the INDIRECT emissions of everything that was imported? Where? > 2.2 Billion tons / year isn’t difficult to track down. It's not like a country imports parcels of CO2, how do you think it works? If we could track down the CO2 emissions of goods, we could write it on the packaging and let people choose the one they want. But we can't, because it's everything but simple. > Even if you assume we’re going to extract all the oil and natural gas that exists the worst case is net zero by 2100 You do realize that it is still largely enough CO2 to make large portions of Earth (around the equator) literally unliveable for humans? Meaning that billions of people will have to relocate, meaning global instability, wars and famines absolutely everywhere, right?
- Retric 3y ago
  No need for that kind of grunt work, plenty of people have wandered that before you. China trade alone has a smaller impact so here’s numbers based on total net imports - exports: https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2 https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2 In 2000 US emissions totaled 6.01 billion tons vs 6.25 billion in terms of consumption. In 2021 that then drops to 5.03 billion tons total vs 5.57 billion in terms of consumption. To scale per capita numbers divide 6.25 B / 281.4 million in 2000 and then multiple by 331.8 million in 2021. Which suggests 7.4 B T if we had done nothing vs 5.57 = a gap of 1.8 B tons over a shorter period. > You do realize that it is still largely enough CO2 to make large portions of Earth (around the equator) literally unliveable for humans? Meaning that billions of people will have to relocate, meaning global instability, wars and famines absolutely everywhere, right? The projections that suggest larger areas become uninhabitable assume massive contributions of CO2 from coal which are already unrealistic. Roughly half the the words coal is being burned in China but they are transitioning fast. “In 2020, China committed to have 1,200 GW of renewables capacity by 2030, but is on track to meet that goal five years early.” They added 216 GW of solar PV in 2023 alone, meanwhile demand is increasing by around 6% / year, so rather than just slow coal power plant construction it’s looking like they are going to start significantly curtailing coal electric production in 2024. It’s said that 1.5C assumes China will end coal use by 2060, but the sooner they start cutting the longer they have to finish.

by Retric 3y ago

palata 3y ago

> You can actually look at what was imported and exported You will have to elaborate on that. Do you mean that somewhere, online, are listed all the INDIRECT emissions of everything that was imported? Where? > 2.2 Billion tons / year isn’t difficult to track down. It's not like a country imports parcels of CO2, how do you think it works? If we could track down the CO2 emissions of goods, we could write it on the packaging and let people choose the one they want. But we can't, because it's everything but simple. > Even if you assume we’re going to extract all the oil and natural gas that exists the worst case is net zero by 2100 You do realize that it is still largely enough CO2 to make large portions of Earth (around the equator) literally unliveable for humans? Meaning that billions of people will have to relocate, meaning global instability, wars and famines absolutely everywhere, right?

Retric 3y ago
No need for that kind of grunt work, plenty of people have wandered that before you. China trade alone has a smaller impact so here’s numbers based on total net imports - exports: https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2 https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2 In 2000 US emissions totaled 6.01 billion tons vs 6.25 billion in terms of consumption. In 2021 that then drops to 5.03 billion tons total vs 5.57 billion in terms of consumption. To scale per capita numbers divide 6.25 B / 281.4 million in 2000 and then multiple by 331.8 million in 2021. Which suggests 7.4 B T if we had done nothing vs 5.57 = a gap of 1.8 B tons over a shorter period. > You do realize that it is still largely enough CO2 to make large portions of Earth (around the equator) literally unliveable for humans? Meaning that billions of people will have to relocate, meaning global instability, wars and famines absolutely everywhere, right? The projections that suggest larger areas become uninhabitable assume massive contributions of CO2 from coal which are already unrealistic. Roughly half the the words coal is being burned in China but they are transitioning fast. “In 2020, China committed to have 1,200 GW of renewables capacity by 2030, but is on track to meet that goal five years early.” They added 216 GW of solar PV in 2023 alone, meanwhile demand is increasing by around 6% / year, so rather than just slow coal power plant construction it’s looking like they are going to start significantly curtailing coal electric production in 2024. It’s said that 1.5C assumes China will end coal use by 2060, but the sooner they start cutting the longer they have to finish.