4 ms·

Nothing? China is solving the problem on their own. They already make substantially less carbon per person that most of the west. If we want to be like China it

Nothing? China is solving the problem on their own. They already make substantially less carbon per person that most of the west. If we want to be like China it's a simple proposition: be OK with Manhattan project level investments in power transmission from places that have lots of renewables to places that need renewables.

rayiner 9mo ago
Climate is determined by total CO2 output, not per capita. That’s a real problem, because China, and all the poor countries in Asia and Africa aren’t going to stop increasing their CO2 output per capita until they reach western standards of living.
- Windchaser 9mo ago
  Sounds like we should pioneer better low-emissions tech, then, and pass it along to them. We've got more expendable income and a better tech base from which to do that.
- throwerxyz 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - rayiner 9mo ago
    Unfortunately, I can imagine the ignorant Americans who don’t realize that all those poor people want SUVs too. You know who doesn’t talk about climate change? Anybody in my family in Bangladesh. They want to live like Americans.
  - dang 9mo ago
    We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - throwerxyz 8mo ago
      What rules did I break? I'm confused. Edit: Ah ok an IP ban. I guess time to use a proxy. Moderation has rules. Censorship does not. Censorship is bad dang mmmkay? Editing again to post later cause you nuked replies for some reason: Sorry I don't conduct in personal attacks. I think you're confused. Feel free to list whom I attacked and where. No, censorship doesn't change definitions based on who uses it. Unless you want to pretend like you're not censoring. You seem to have convinced yourself that your censorship is a form of moderation, very sad. You're free to censor whom and what you want, it's your site. Don't pretend it's moderation though. Your guidelines are meaningless if censorship is so heavy handed and moderation non-existant. It's hard to moderate. It's easy to censor. Anyway you have curated, through censorship, a place where people are afraid to share valid opinions that break no guidelines (except those magical ones you can produce in order to censor). You can congratulate yourself on that if you want. You've got a ghost town, whether you like it or not.
      - dang 8mo ago
        An entire thwack of personal attacks, for starters. Not allowed here. I don't think that's so confusing. > Censorship is bad dang mmmkay? It's one of those words that mean different things depending on how people want to use it. I wouldn't personally use that word as opposed to moderation, curation, etc., but then I would say that wouldn't I. In any case, HN isn't an anything-goes site and never has been. If we didn't do some version of moderation/curation/censorship/befugioning, it would be an entirely different place. Probably not one even you would enjoy—I don't suppose you like ghost towns or scorched earth any more than the rest of us.
        throwerxyz 8mo ago
        No, censorship doesn't change definitions based on who uses it. Unless you want to pretend like you're not censoring. You seem to have convinced yourself that your censorship is a form of moderation, very sad. You're free to censor whom and what you want, it's your site. Don't pretend it's moderation though. Your guidelines are meaningless if censorship is so heavy handed and moderation non-existant. It's hard to moderate. It's easy to censor. Anyway you have curated, through censorship, a place where people are afraid to share valid opinions that break no guidelines (except those magical ones you can produce in order to censor). You can congratulate yourself on that if you want. You've got a ghost town, whether you like it or not.
- danny_codes 9mo ago
  Except that they will stop. China has already stopped, because they’re bringing up renewables for new capacity. In 5, max 10 years it will be ludicrous to spin up a fossil fuel power plant. Solar power is already cheaper than coal and prices are dropping like a stone as China ramps production capacity / techniques/ process.
- triceratops 8mo ago
  Actually climate is determined by cumulative CO2 emitted. The US and Europe have emitted far more than China ever has. As of today, solar and batteries are the cheapest source of electricity. All the "poor countries in Asia and Africa", except the ones that have oil and gas, will leapfrog straight to renewables. It just makes good sense, unless your politicians are paid off by the fossil fuel lobby.

rayiner 9mo ago

Climate is determined by total CO2 output, not per capita. That’s a real problem, because China, and all the poor countries in Asia and Africa aren’t going to stop increasing their CO2 output per capita until they reach western standards of living.

Windchaser 9mo ago
Sounds like we should pioneer better low-emissions tech, then, and pass it along to them. We've got more expendable income and a better tech base from which to do that.
throwerxyz 9mo ago
[flagged]
- rayiner 9mo ago
  Unfortunately, I can imagine the ignorant Americans who don’t realize that all those poor people want SUVs too. You know who doesn’t talk about climate change? Anybody in my family in Bangladesh. They want to live like Americans.
- dang 9mo ago
  We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - throwerxyz 8mo ago
    What rules did I break? I'm confused. Edit: Ah ok an IP ban. I guess time to use a proxy. Moderation has rules. Censorship does not. Censorship is bad dang mmmkay? Editing again to post later cause you nuked replies for some reason: Sorry I don't conduct in personal attacks. I think you're confused. Feel free to list whom I attacked and where. No, censorship doesn't change definitions based on who uses it. Unless you want to pretend like you're not censoring. You seem to have convinced yourself that your censorship is a form of moderation, very sad. You're free to censor whom and what you want, it's your site. Don't pretend it's moderation though. Your guidelines are meaningless if censorship is so heavy handed and moderation non-existant. It's hard to moderate. It's easy to censor. Anyway you have curated, through censorship, a place where people are afraid to share valid opinions that break no guidelines (except those magical ones you can produce in order to censor). You can congratulate yourself on that if you want. You've got a ghost town, whether you like it or not.
    - dang 8mo ago
      An entire thwack of personal attacks, for starters. Not allowed here. I don't think that's so confusing. > Censorship is bad dang mmmkay? It's one of those words that mean different things depending on how people want to use it. I wouldn't personally use that word as opposed to moderation, curation, etc., but then I would say that wouldn't I. In any case, HN isn't an anything-goes site and never has been. If we didn't do some version of moderation/curation/censorship/befugioning, it would be an entirely different place. Probably not one even you would enjoy—I don't suppose you like ghost towns or scorched earth any more than the rest of us.
      - throwerxyz 8mo ago
        No, censorship doesn't change definitions based on who uses it. Unless you want to pretend like you're not censoring. You seem to have convinced yourself that your censorship is a form of moderation, very sad. You're free to censor whom and what you want, it's your site. Don't pretend it's moderation though. Your guidelines are meaningless if censorship is so heavy handed and moderation non-existant. It's hard to moderate. It's easy to censor. Anyway you have curated, through censorship, a place where people are afraid to share valid opinions that break no guidelines (except those magical ones you can produce in order to censor). You can congratulate yourself on that if you want. You've got a ghost town, whether you like it or not.
danny_codes 9mo ago
Except that they will stop. China has already stopped, because they’re bringing up renewables for new capacity. In 5, max 10 years it will be ludicrous to spin up a fossil fuel power plant. Solar power is already cheaper than coal and prices are dropping like a stone as China ramps production capacity / techniques/ process.
triceratops 8mo ago
Actually climate is determined by cumulative CO2 emitted. The US and Europe have emitted far more than China ever has. As of today, solar and batteries are the cheapest source of electricity. All the "poor countries in Asia and Africa", except the ones that have oil and gas, will leapfrog straight to renewables. It just makes good sense, unless your politicians are paid off by the fossil fuel lobby.