3 ms·

It's hard to have people use data in these types of conversations, so I'll just link two charts. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita htt

by internet2000 28d ago

It's hard to have people use data in these types of conversations, so I'll just link two charts. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita and https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-region https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-re... Notice which countries are going down. Notice which countries are going up.

deleted 28d ago
[deleted]
Faaak 28d ago
That's such a narrow minded point of view. Yeah, who produces your laptop ? Your lawnmower ? Heck, even your knifes ?
Tadpole9181 28d ago
Hey, quick question, who does virtually all manufacturing for US and Canadian and EU citizens? And why is the rise of Chinas emissions so coincidentally timed to the fall of those countries'? I didn't go into the study, but looking at all the little text blurbs about the numbers, I don't see anything about if a US citizen purchasing a product that's made in China counts as US emission, as it obviously should.
- zb3 28d ago
  My view is that current "emission reduction" just moves jobs to China and India, which decreases overall labor rights and negatively affects the working class.. Still, if you want to have your new iPhone 18/19/20 pro ultra max, it has to be produced somewhere.. So maybe it's time to rethink this and get back to the drawing board..
  - kennywinker 28d ago
    Actual emissions reductions is different from just shell-gaming emissions from the US column to the China column. Greenwashing is real, but that doesn’t mean reducing emissions isn’t a real thing we can do.
- internet2000 28d ago
  Are we forcing China to make stuff for us?
  - kalleboo 28d ago
    If China suddenly stopped exporting to the US overnight, you can bet you would.
  - MetroWind 27d ago
    Yes, by paying money.
tzs 28d ago
One of the countries that is going up (China) is also doing more than any other country to rapidly roll out renewables both domestically and in other countries, and their emissions have peaked or are near peaking, and is capable of sticking with long term plans. Also a lot of their emissions are from making things for the rest of the world. The other country that has grown significantly in the last 20 years (India) is still far below using their fair share of the world emission budget, and they are rapidly adding renewables. The sane way for a planet to use fossil fuels is for countries to use them to build up to the stage where they are wealthy enough to switch to renewables. If the ones that do that earlier stay on fossil fuels too long so that you get climate problems they can't just expect the countries that are not as far a long to just give up on becoming wealthy. They need to heavily subsidize those other countries in renewables so they can shorten or skip the fossil fuel bootstrap stage. Because of the long time CO2 stays around in the atmosphere, about 40% of the CO2 currently in the atmosphere from human activity came from the US and Europe.
- caminante 28d ago
  Also a lot of their emissions are from making things for the rest of the world. That doesn't make it righteous and is a common critique of their coal powered PV manufacturing base. They're playing games with carbon commitments with arbitrary reduction goals from undefined peaks. We can't trust them. Meanwhile, they're currently building >200GW of new coal plants.
  - tzs 28d ago
    > Meanwhile, they're currently building >200GW of new coal plants Many are being built as backups and peakers rather than baseload, designed (or retrofitted in the case of existing plants being upgraded) to be able to cycle up and down to balance wind and solar. They are running at low capacity factors, not actually burning much coal. Many of these are idle so much that their owners have financial difficulty keeping them open, and the government has had to start paying them for their idle time so they won't go under. Most of the rest are to replace existing plants that cannot not yet be replaced with renewables, so are at worst neutral on coal usage and are usually actually more efficient than the old plants so there is a reduction.
1d22a 27d ago
Consumption-based charts are much better, as they account for the actual CO2 emissions of lifestyle in the country (since offshoring manufacturing from developed countries to developing countries doesn't reduce the total emissions, even if it makes our direct emissions stats look better). https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capit...

deleted 28d ago

[deleted]

Faaak 28d ago

That's such a narrow minded point of view. Yeah, who produces your laptop ? Your lawnmower ? Heck, even your knifes ?

Tadpole9181 28d ago

Hey, quick question, who does virtually all manufacturing for US and Canadian and EU citizens? And why is the rise of Chinas emissions so coincidentally timed to the fall of those countries'? I didn't go into the study, but looking at all the little text blurbs about the numbers, I don't see anything about if a US citizen purchasing a product that's made in China counts as US emission, as it obviously should.

zb3 28d ago
My view is that current "emission reduction" just moves jobs to China and India, which decreases overall labor rights and negatively affects the working class.. Still, if you want to have your new iPhone 18/19/20 pro ultra max, it has to be produced somewhere.. So maybe it's time to rethink this and get back to the drawing board..
- kennywinker 28d ago
  Actual emissions reductions is different from just shell-gaming emissions from the US column to the China column. Greenwashing is real, but that doesn’t mean reducing emissions isn’t a real thing we can do.
internet2000 28d ago
Are we forcing China to make stuff for us?
- kalleboo 28d ago
  If China suddenly stopped exporting to the US overnight, you can bet you would.
- MetroWind 27d ago
  Yes, by paying money.

tzs 28d ago

One of the countries that is going up (China) is also doing more than any other country to rapidly roll out renewables both domestically and in other countries, and their emissions have peaked or are near peaking, and is capable of sticking with long term plans. Also a lot of their emissions are from making things for the rest of the world. The other country that has grown significantly in the last 20 years (India) is still far below using their fair share of the world emission budget, and they are rapidly adding renewables. The sane way for a planet to use fossil fuels is for countries to use them to build up to the stage where they are wealthy enough to switch to renewables. If the ones that do that earlier stay on fossil fuels too long so that you get climate problems they can't just expect the countries that are not as far a long to just give up on becoming wealthy. They need to heavily subsidize those other countries in renewables so they can shorten or skip the fossil fuel bootstrap stage. Because of the long time CO2 stays around in the atmosphere, about 40% of the CO2 currently in the atmosphere from human activity came from the US and Europe.

caminante 28d ago
Also a lot of their emissions are from making things for the rest of the world. That doesn't make it righteous and is a common critique of their coal powered PV manufacturing base. They're playing games with carbon commitments with arbitrary reduction goals from undefined peaks. We can't trust them. Meanwhile, they're currently building >200GW of new coal plants.
- tzs 28d ago
  > Meanwhile, they're currently building >200GW of new coal plants Many are being built as backups and peakers rather than baseload, designed (or retrofitted in the case of existing plants being upgraded) to be able to cycle up and down to balance wind and solar. They are running at low capacity factors, not actually burning much coal. Many of these are idle so much that their owners have financial difficulty keeping them open, and the government has had to start paying them for their idle time so they won't go under. Most of the rest are to replace existing plants that cannot not yet be replaced with renewables, so are at worst neutral on coal usage and are usually actually more efficient than the old plants so there is a reduction.

1d22a 27d ago

Consumption-based charts are much better, as they account for the actual CO2 emissions of lifestyle in the country (since offshoring manufacturing from developed countries to developing countries doesn't reduce the total emissions, even if it makes our direct emissions stats look better). https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capit...