3 ms·

The point of that comment is not that the talking is happening, it's that the hope of action isn't going to be blocked by industry-captured and plain moronic co

The point of that comment is not that the talking is happening, it's that the hope of action isn't going to be blocked by industry-captured and plain moronic countries like Saudia Arabia and US, respectively. Even if these countries are a smaller part of the climate affecting processes, any forward motion is good at this point. They can also help build economies of scale, and take advantage of the myriad economic benefits of renewables that other countries are leaving on the table.

cmxch 5mo ago
The US still has enough power to stop it though, thankfully. We aren’t captured by environmental activists that force the poor to shoulder the compliance burden while the rich get to defer and delay.
- tardedmeme 5mo ago
  Why is it thankful the US has the power to force everyone to keep wasting money on US-controlled energy sources? What's the difference between this situation and a Mafia protection racket?
- mc32 5mo ago
  Many people don’t realize the IPCC walked back (refined as they put it) some of its most dire scenarios… others may choose to ignore the walkback. Akin to the rocket and feather phenomenon that affects pricing.
  - altcognito 5mo ago
    It was based on co2 emissions doubling by 2050. Though energy output has doubled, as a share coal has dropped in China and the US. Wouldn’t you expect estimates based on difficult to predict human behavior to change based on new data?
    - mc32 5mo ago
      Many people were saying that things were not as dire as they claimed. I’m glad they revised but you had silly people gluing themselves to thoroughfares (cars stuck in traffic waste more energy) and vandalizing what some people consider precious art and or national patrimony in the name of climate change thinking that those most dire predictions were indeed correct and we were all headed to hell in a hand basket.
      - TheOtherHobbes 5mo ago
        Ruined cars piled up in streets waste even more energy - temporarily. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-floods-in-spain-so-bad-a-visual-guide https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-f...
      - DangitBobby 5mo ago
        So we are no longer worried about catastrophic or runaway climate change based on these revisions?
        mc32 5mo ago
        That’s tough to say. Weather systems are difficult to model. We have minimal understanding of the causes or inputs that control the very long climate cycles. Like we know that some day thousands of years from now we’ll have another unstoppable glacial period. We’ll also have a period free of polar ice. Those are cyclical and independent of CO2. We cannot stop either. We live in a very precious time. I also think we should limit or be judicious as much as we can about what we pump into the atmosphere (or oceans or ground)
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        Sabinus 5mo ago
        So the climate scientists of every government are lying? The calculations about how much heat is trapped by different CO2 amounts, bunk?
alephnerd 5mo ago
> Even if these countries are a smaller part of the climate affecting processes, any forward motion is good at this point China, The US, and India all turned down invites despite generating 34%, 12%, and 7.6% of global emissions respectively [0] If the world's 3 largest polluters (even if two of them are heavily investing in GreenTech) who represent ~54% of global emissions are not interested in the conversation, it's all for naught. None of the attendees are in the position to pressure the big 3 polluters. And it doesn't matter - the larger countries know they can eat the cost of climate change. It's the poorer or smaller countries that face the brunt of the impact. And it's only going to get worse. India turned down hosting COP33 in 2028 [1] because India is deciding to to double down on coal [2] as the Iran Crisis has shown China's bet on Coal Gasification that began during the Iraq War [3] was correct. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... [1] - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/india-withdraws-bid-host-annual-un-climate-talks-2028-2026-04-08/ https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/india-withdraws-b... [2] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-05/india-mulls-extending-coal-power-expansion-for-another-12-years https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-05/india-mul... [3] - https://usea.org/sites/default/files/022011_Coal-to-oil,%20gas%20and%20chemicals%20in%20China_ccc181.pdf https://usea.org/sites/default/files/022011_Coal-to-oil,%20g...
- applfanboysbgon 5mo ago
  It is beyond shameful how Westerners misallocate the blame for pollution, using misleading statistics. India has ~17% of the world's population. That it only produces 7% of global emissions means it is contributing far, far, far less than whatever country you possibly come from in relative terms, so at that point you are besmirching it solely for the crime of having a larger population than your country. China, while having a disproportionate share of the pollution relative to its population, only has that pollution because the West offshored almost the entirety of its manufacturing capacity to China. Is China really at fault for pollution caused creating goods for the West? If China shuts down all export manufacturing overnight, and the West is forced to resume manufacturing for itself, resulting in ~the same global emissions, is that what's necessary to stop blaming China even though there's no shift in demand for manufactured goods or total pollution? Moreover, China is investing more seriously into non-fossil-fuel energy than any country in the West, by far. If you let the West resume its own manufacturing, you would actually end up with higher total emissions, because the West does not take this subject seriously at all.

cmxch 5mo ago

The US still has enough power to stop it though, thankfully. We aren’t captured by environmental activists that force the poor to shoulder the compliance burden while the rich get to defer and delay.

tardedmeme 5mo ago
Why is it thankful the US has the power to force everyone to keep wasting money on US-controlled energy sources? What's the difference between this situation and a Mafia protection racket?
mc32 5mo ago
Many people don’t realize the IPCC walked back (refined as they put it) some of its most dire scenarios… others may choose to ignore the walkback. Akin to the rocket and feather phenomenon that affects pricing.
- altcognito 5mo ago
  It was based on co2 emissions doubling by 2050. Though energy output has doubled, as a share coal has dropped in China and the US. Wouldn’t you expect estimates based on difficult to predict human behavior to change based on new data?
  - mc32 5mo ago
    Many people were saying that things were not as dire as they claimed. I’m glad they revised but you had silly people gluing themselves to thoroughfares (cars stuck in traffic waste more energy) and vandalizing what some people consider precious art and or national patrimony in the name of climate change thinking that those most dire predictions were indeed correct and we were all headed to hell in a hand basket.
    - TheOtherHobbes 5mo ago
      Ruined cars piled up in streets waste even more energy - temporarily. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-floods-in-spain-so-bad-a-visual-guide https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-f...
    - DangitBobby 5mo ago
      So we are no longer worried about catastrophic or runaway climate change based on these revisions?
      - mc32 5mo ago
        That’s tough to say. Weather systems are difficult to model. We have minimal understanding of the causes or inputs that control the very long climate cycles. Like we know that some day thousands of years from now we’ll have another unstoppable glacial period. We’ll also have a period free of polar ice. Those are cyclical and independent of CO2. We cannot stop either. We live in a very precious time. I also think we should limit or be judicious as much as we can about what we pump into the atmosphere (or oceans or ground)
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        Sabinus 5mo ago
        So the climate scientists of every government are lying? The calculations about how much heat is trapped by different CO2 amounts, bunk?

alephnerd 5mo ago

> Even if these countries are a smaller part of the climate affecting processes, any forward motion is good at this point China, The US, and India all turned down invites despite generating 34%, 12%, and 7.6% of global emissions respectively [0] If the world's 3 largest polluters (even if two of them are heavily investing in GreenTech) who represent ~54% of global emissions are not interested in the conversation, it's all for naught. None of the attendees are in the position to pressure the big 3 polluters. And it doesn't matter - the larger countries know they can eat the cost of climate change. It's the poorer or smaller countries that face the brunt of the impact. And it's only going to get worse. India turned down hosting COP33 in 2028 [1] because India is deciding to to double down on coal [2] as the Iran Crisis has shown China's bet on Coal Gasification that began during the Iraq War [3] was correct. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... [1] - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/india-withdraws-bid-host-annual-un-climate-talks-2028-2026-04-08/ https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/india-withdraws-b... [2] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-05/india-mulls-extending-coal-power-expansion-for-another-12-years https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-05/india-mul... [3] - https://usea.org/sites/default/files/022011_Coal-to-oil,%20gas%20and%20chemicals%20in%20China_ccc181.pdf https://usea.org/sites/default/files/022011_Coal-to-oil,%20g...

applfanboysbgon 5mo ago
It is beyond shameful how Westerners misallocate the blame for pollution, using misleading statistics. India has ~17% of the world's population. That it only produces 7% of global emissions means it is contributing far, far, far less than whatever country you possibly come from in relative terms, so at that point you are besmirching it solely for the crime of having a larger population than your country. China, while having a disproportionate share of the pollution relative to its population, only has that pollution because the West offshored almost the entirety of its manufacturing capacity to China. Is China really at fault for pollution caused creating goods for the West? If China shuts down all export manufacturing overnight, and the West is forced to resume manufacturing for itself, resulting in ~the same global emissions, is that what's necessary to stop blaming China even though there's no shift in demand for manufactured goods or total pollution? Moreover, China is investing more seriously into non-fossil-fuel energy than any country in the West, by far. If you let the West resume its own manufacturing, you would actually end up with higher total emissions, because the West does not take this subject seriously at all.