3 ms·

The quote from your link: > China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year

by tlogan 7mo ago

The quote from your link: > China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is a great progress?

ben_w 7mo ago
> So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is progress? Yes. Obviously. Because of why it happened, and because of how it didn't come with a recession this time. Enough progress? I doubt it. But it is progress, and it's China doing it while still growing their economy, so it's time to end this idea that China's emissions are a reason for anyone else to refuse action.
- tlogan 7mo ago
  I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. I think there will be a little upward adjustment from “likely” numbers because of this AI thingy. https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions
  - ben_w 7mo ago
    > I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. You sure about that? With your recent comment history, you've been claiming victory for your rhetorical position without waiting for "official" stats (what makes a stat official?), and deny the stats which do exist as "propaganda". That is in fact why I noted my newer reference was pointing to the same domain as you were using to claim yours. As an aside: It's not like this is even a proper environmental victory condition yet, see my other links on that, just that the rate at which CO2 is going up (due to China) is not itself going up. "Victory" happens when atmospheric CO2 goes past 400 ppm again, this time downwards. All that can be said positively about China here is "heading in the right direction", although you seem to have a bee in your bonnet to deny even that.
    - tlogan 7mo ago
      The only data I trust are from IEA. And the data they are publishing are not encouraging for the future of the world.

by tlogan 7mo ago

ben_w 7mo ago

> So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is progress? Yes. Obviously. Because of why it happened, and because of how it didn't come with a recession this time. Enough progress? I doubt it. But it is progress, and it's China doing it while still growing their economy, so it's time to end this idea that China's emissions are a reason for anyone else to refuse action.

tlogan 7mo ago
I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. I think there will be a little upward adjustment from “likely” numbers because of this AI thingy. https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions
- ben_w 7mo ago
  > I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. You sure about that? With your recent comment history, you've been claiming victory for your rhetorical position without waiting for "official" stats (what makes a stat official?), and deny the stats which do exist as "propaganda". That is in fact why I noted my newer reference was pointing to the same domain as you were using to claim yours. As an aside: It's not like this is even a proper environmental victory condition yet, see my other links on that, just that the rate at which CO2 is going up (due to China) is not itself going up. "Victory" happens when atmospheric CO2 goes past 400 ppm again, this time downwards. All that can be said positively about China here is "heading in the right direction", although you seem to have a bee in your bonnet to deny even that.
  - tlogan 7mo ago
    The only data I trust are from IEA. And the data they are publishing are not encouraging for the future of the world.