4 ms·

Not a troll comment. China produces as much or more CO2 as much as the next 5 countries combined. It's logical to start with the king of greenhouse emissions i

Not a troll comment. China produces as much or more CO2 as much as the next 5 countries combined. It's logical to start with the king of greenhouse emissions if you want to stop global warming.

laffOr 8mo ago
There is no need for ordering right? All countries can start acting at the same time.
generj 8mo ago
China is rapidly going green.
- reducesuffering 8mo ago
  Is the US even more rapidly going green? https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?hideControls=false&Gas+or+Warming=CO%E2%82%82&Accounting=Territorial&Fuel+or+Land+Use+Change=All+fossil+emissions&Count=Per+country&country=CHN~USA~IND~GBR~OWID_WRL https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?hideControls=false&... China's emissions were 10 billion tons CO2 in 2017 and have increased every single year to 12.29 billion tons CO2 in 2024. Meanwhile, US decreased from 5.22 to 4.9 in the same time
  - michaelmrose 8mo ago
    1/4 the population. Per capita we are 65% worse not considering how much of China's pollution is on our behalf
    - Windchaser 8mo ago
      Yeah, and don't even get me started on historic emissions. China has only produced significant CO2/capita in the last decade. The US and Europe are responsible for the accumulated GHG that have gotten us into the current mess. We blew nearly the entire CO2 "budget" for keeping us under 2C of warming, just by ourselves, so it's kinda odd to be pointing fingers at the foreigners who are just now halfway catching up to what we're emitting now.
      - reducesuffering 8mo ago
        But those historic emissions have also produced scientific and engineering progress that other developing nations got to piggyback off of for their development.
        Windchaser 8mo ago
        Aye, true, but we also then have a responsibility to produce scientific and engineering progress to get off of fossil fuels. And then to follow through, and get off fossil fuels.
  - shoxidizer 8mo ago
    Both these trends have reversed in 2025. US emissions icreased by 2.5% https://rhg.com/research/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2025/ https://rhg.com/research/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2025/ China's emmisions have decreased by <1% https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china-emissions-decline https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china-emissions-decline
renjimen 8mo ago
Not per capita. The US is still the worst large country. If you account for offshoring manufacturing then the US looks even worse. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions
- reducesuffering 8mo ago
  Why should should per-capita be most important? If country A keeps their population stable and emissions under control, but country B of the same starting population, keeps doubling their population and doubling their emissions, why should country A have an increasingly declined allowance of emissions when they were more responsible in keeping their total emissions down (by not having as many people)?
  - hiccuphippo 8mo ago
    Because some countries pay others to pollute in their stead?
  - layer8 8mo ago
    China has a declining population, and had a one-child policy for many years. Also, you don’t want all the low-population countries to each start contributing as much to global warming as the US.
  - shoxidizer 8mo ago
    If country B splits into countries C, D, E and F, all of which emit less than country A, has it found an effective way to reduce emissions? Should all countries adopt the Monaco lifestyle to defeat global warming? I guess if you want to find a fair way to measure administration of land you could emmisions per hectare or rainfall.
  - Scarblac 8mo ago
    Because per capita is the only thing that makes sense. If China were to split into 10 countries each emitting 10% of what they do now it'd be the exact same emissions, but according to you it would be much better. Similarly if the EU would become one country, that country would be high up on the list, much higher than member countries now! Oh no! Looking at per capita emissions is much more fair. Anyway, China's emissions are falling since last year ( https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-have-now-been-flat-or-falling-for-21-months/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha... ). What's the US doing?
smt88 8mo ago
You can't really isolate China's emissions. They manufacture a huge proportion of the goods the rest of the world needs to operate. The green countries are essentially outsourcing their pollution to China.
throwerxyz 8mo ago
[flagged]
danny_codes 8mo ago
China is bringing online a stupendous amount of renewables. They’ve blown through their own targets on solar energy deployments. With where batteries are headed I suspect their CO2 emissions will drop much faster than expected. Already they’ve hit peak coal and it’s on the way down

Not a troll comment. China produces as much or more CO2 as much as the next 5 countries combined. It's logical to start with the king of greenhouse emissions if you want to stop global warming.

laffOr 8mo ago

There is no need for ordering right? All countries can start acting at the same time.

generj 8mo ago

China is rapidly going green.

reducesuffering 8mo ago
Is the US even more rapidly going green? https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?hideControls=false&Gas+or+Warming=CO%E2%82%82&Accounting=Territorial&Fuel+or+Land+Use+Change=All+fossil+emissions&Count=Per+country&country=CHN~USA~IND~GBR~OWID_WRL https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?hideControls=false&... China's emissions were 10 billion tons CO2 in 2017 and have increased every single year to 12.29 billion tons CO2 in 2024. Meanwhile, US decreased from 5.22 to 4.9 in the same time
- michaelmrose 8mo ago
  1/4 the population. Per capita we are 65% worse not considering how much of China's pollution is on our behalf
  - Windchaser 8mo ago
    Yeah, and don't even get me started on historic emissions. China has only produced significant CO2/capita in the last decade. The US and Europe are responsible for the accumulated GHG that have gotten us into the current mess. We blew nearly the entire CO2 "budget" for keeping us under 2C of warming, just by ourselves, so it's kinda odd to be pointing fingers at the foreigners who are just now halfway catching up to what we're emitting now.
    - reducesuffering 8mo ago
      But those historic emissions have also produced scientific and engineering progress that other developing nations got to piggyback off of for their development.
      - Windchaser 8mo ago
        Aye, true, but we also then have a responsibility to produce scientific and engineering progress to get off of fossil fuels. And then to follow through, and get off fossil fuels.
- shoxidizer 8mo ago
  Both these trends have reversed in 2025. US emissions icreased by 2.5% https://rhg.com/research/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2025/ https://rhg.com/research/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2025/ China's emmisions have decreased by <1% https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china-emissions-decline https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china-emissions-decline

renjimen 8mo ago

Not per capita. The US is still the worst large country. If you account for offshoring manufacturing then the US looks even worse. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions

reducesuffering 8mo ago
Why should should per-capita be most important? If country A keeps their population stable and emissions under control, but country B of the same starting population, keeps doubling their population and doubling their emissions, why should country A have an increasingly declined allowance of emissions when they were more responsible in keeping their total emissions down (by not having as many people)?
- hiccuphippo 8mo ago
  Because some countries pay others to pollute in their stead?
- layer8 8mo ago
  China has a declining population, and had a one-child policy for many years. Also, you don’t want all the low-population countries to each start contributing as much to global warming as the US.
- shoxidizer 8mo ago
  If country B splits into countries C, D, E and F, all of which emit less than country A, has it found an effective way to reduce emissions? Should all countries adopt the Monaco lifestyle to defeat global warming? I guess if you want to find a fair way to measure administration of land you could emmisions per hectare or rainfall.
- Scarblac 8mo ago
  Because per capita is the only thing that makes sense. If China were to split into 10 countries each emitting 10% of what they do now it'd be the exact same emissions, but according to you it would be much better. Similarly if the EU would become one country, that country would be high up on the list, much higher than member countries now! Oh no! Looking at per capita emissions is much more fair. Anyway, China's emissions are falling since last year ( https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-have-now-been-flat-or-falling-for-21-months/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha... ). What's the US doing?

smt88 8mo ago

You can't really isolate China's emissions. They manufacture a huge proportion of the goods the rest of the world needs to operate. The green countries are essentially outsourcing their pollution to China.

throwerxyz 8mo ago

[flagged]

danny_codes 8mo ago

China is bringing online a stupendous amount of renewables. They’ve blown through their own targets on solar energy deployments. With where batteries are headed I suspect their CO2 emissions will drop much faster than expected. Already they’ve hit peak coal and it’s on the way down