4 ms·

emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different. Emissions post 2014 climate agreement are weighed even heavier.

digitalPhonix 17d ago
What does "weighted" mean in "emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different"? The chart you're responding to has no weighting, 1 tonne of CO2 produced is 1 tonne of CO2 produced regardless of when.
- AuthAuth 17d ago
  Weighted means we should consider them differently. 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you have no idea what global warming is hits very different to 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you've known about global warming for 60 years and the entire world has come together and said lets start trying to reduce emissions. If at that point you start slapping down 60 coal plants and moon shotting your co2 pollution then you should be blamed for global warming.
  - digitalPhonix 17d ago
    So whoever industrialises before there's scientific consensus on climate change gets to keep the benefits of their pollution and those who don't have to somehow skip that part of the tech tree and jump straight to renewables/nuclear? I can see why the countries that were not first to industrialise are not on board with that idea.
    - AuthAuth 14d ago
      So you're fine for every country to industrialize in the cheapest dirtiest way and destroy the world because other its "unfair". No one is saying they cant industrialize, only that they have to be cautious about their emissions and make an attempt to reduce them. For example, instead of operating a steel mill from the 60s and building a new one copying the old design use a new design that has less emissions.
      - showmexyz 14d ago
        Yes that is for the best. Countries like India and China are moving away from fossil fuels faster than previous developed countries did. Still not enough but surely something.
        AuthAuth 14d ago
        You can say that but fossil fuels are still a huge part of their energy grid and energy generation is only one part of industrializing. Even if they did it 100% renewably which they arent it would still be devastating to the world. It doesnt matter if its right or not they will act in their own interest. But its pretty dumb that we sit around in the west arguing about the emissions from a few gas turbines when china is deploying 60 coal plants a year and burning rubbish.

digitalPhonix 17d ago

What does "weighted" mean in "emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different"? The chart you're responding to has no weighting, 1 tonne of CO2 produced is 1 tonne of CO2 produced regardless of when.

AuthAuth 17d ago
Weighted means we should consider them differently. 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you have no idea what global warming is hits very different to 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you've known about global warming for 60 years and the entire world has come together and said lets start trying to reduce emissions. If at that point you start slapping down 60 coal plants and moon shotting your co2 pollution then you should be blamed for global warming.
- digitalPhonix 17d ago
  So whoever industrialises before there's scientific consensus on climate change gets to keep the benefits of their pollution and those who don't have to somehow skip that part of the tech tree and jump straight to renewables/nuclear? I can see why the countries that were not first to industrialise are not on board with that idea.
  - AuthAuth 14d ago
    So you're fine for every country to industrialize in the cheapest dirtiest way and destroy the world because other its "unfair". No one is saying they cant industrialize, only that they have to be cautious about their emissions and make an attempt to reduce them. For example, instead of operating a steel mill from the 60s and building a new one copying the old design use a new design that has less emissions.
    - showmexyz 14d ago
      Yes that is for the best. Countries like India and China are moving away from fossil fuels faster than previous developed countries did. Still not enough but surely something.
      - AuthAuth 14d ago
        You can say that but fossil fuels are still a huge part of their energy grid and energy generation is only one part of industrializing. Even if they did it 100% renewably which they arent it would still be devastating to the world. It doesnt matter if its right or not they will act in their own interest. But its pretty dumb that we sit around in the west arguing about the emissions from a few gas turbines when china is deploying 60 coal plants a year and burning rubbish.