4 ms·

I generally agree with you, but in terms of CO2 output the West is not really the problem anymore. It's developing countries, and the general argument they have

I generally agree with you, but in terms of CO2 output the West is not really the problem anymore. It's developing countries, and the general argument they have is that "why should we have to suffer with slower economic output when you didn't?"

adrianN 2y ago
"The West" is absolutely still the problem. No country is on a path that is compatible with 2° warming.
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  No country in the world is on a path compatible with the supposed 2 degree goal, and it's not mainly a problem of the West. I think the whole climate freakout is a scam in the first place. In any case, the West should not cripple itself as other countries continue business as usual. We can't survive like that, and it won't be the climate that gets us either.
renewiltord 2y ago
Yeah, but that's not going to work because we used carbon to fuel growth and then decarbonized. Everyone else saw that China did the same thing to raise half a billion out of poverty. Everyone remaining saw that India raised more than that out of poverty burning carbon. It's not like we're going to give developing countries nuclear power so their choice is coal, natural gas, wind, and solar. And inevitably they follow that specific chain of energy build-out as their growing economy starts cleaning up. No one has demonstrated a high-scale success that is not that.
pshc 2y ago
If anything the West needs to to be a model and driver for a carbon neutral or negative lifestyle. We burned all the carbon in the first place, and developing countries will suffer the consequences disproportionately.
abdullahkhalids 2y ago
Let's look at the data [1], which should be a table of per capita emission/country, sorted by 2022 numbers. The countries at the top have to make the largest changes in their socio-economic systems in order to get close to zero emissions. While countries at the bottom have to make minimal changes. They simply have to not emit in the future by using carbon-neutral methods to attain improved human well-being. You will note in the table [2], that at the top are the oil producing countries in the Middle East, followed by Canada, USA, and Australia. Most of the large European countries are far below. The bottom half of the table obviously contains no West countries. China has half the per capita emissions of USA/Canada/Australia, and the same as current Europe, and it's already decreasing both its population and soon its per capita emissions. It's precisely the people in the Middle East and USA/Canada/Australia have to make the largest changes in their systems. China+Europe have to follow the same downward trajectories. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?tab=table&time=2011..latest&facet=none&hideControls=false&Gas+or+Warming=CO%E2%82%82&Accounting=Territorial&Fuel+or+Land+Use+Change=All+fossil+emissions&Count=Per+capita&Relative+to+world+total=false https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?tab=table&time=2011... [2] Please ignore small countries, which have negligible total emissions.

adrianN 2y ago

"The West" is absolutely still the problem. No country is on a path that is compatible with 2° warming.

wakawaka28 2y ago
No country in the world is on a path compatible with the supposed 2 degree goal, and it's not mainly a problem of the West. I think the whole climate freakout is a scam in the first place. In any case, the West should not cripple itself as other countries continue business as usual. We can't survive like that, and it won't be the climate that gets us either.

renewiltord 2y ago

Yeah, but that's not going to work because we used carbon to fuel growth and then decarbonized. Everyone else saw that China did the same thing to raise half a billion out of poverty. Everyone remaining saw that India raised more than that out of poverty burning carbon. It's not like we're going to give developing countries nuclear power so their choice is coal, natural gas, wind, and solar. And inevitably they follow that specific chain of energy build-out as their growing economy starts cleaning up. No one has demonstrated a high-scale success that is not that.

pshc 2y ago

If anything the West needs to to be a model and driver for a carbon neutral or negative lifestyle. We burned all the carbon in the first place, and developing countries will suffer the consequences disproportionately.

abdullahkhalids 2y ago

Let's look at the data [1], which should be a table of per capita emission/country, sorted by 2022 numbers. The countries at the top have to make the largest changes in their socio-economic systems in order to get close to zero emissions. While countries at the bottom have to make minimal changes. They simply have to not emit in the future by using carbon-neutral methods to attain improved human well-being. You will note in the table [2], that at the top are the oil producing countries in the Middle East, followed by Canada, USA, and Australia. Most of the large European countries are far below. The bottom half of the table obviously contains no West countries. China has half the per capita emissions of USA/Canada/Australia, and the same as current Europe, and it's already decreasing both its population and soon its per capita emissions. It's precisely the people in the Middle East and USA/Canada/Australia have to make the largest changes in their systems. China+Europe have to follow the same downward trajectories. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?tab=table&time=2011..latest&facet=none&hideControls=false&Gas+or+Warming=CO%E2%82%82&Accounting=Territorial&Fuel+or+Land+Use+Change=All+fossil+emissions&Count=Per+capita&Relative+to+world+total=false https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?tab=table&time=2011... [2] Please ignore small countries, which have negligible total emissions.