China's carbon emissions per capita are less than half that of the USA and their total emission have flattened over the last few years even as their industrial capacity continues to increase, due to an aggressive program of installing solar and wind electrical power generation.
Climate and Weather
- Thread starter espola
- Start date
Happened again
SILVER ELITE
do you like apples or oranges?
My response is appropriate to the question "What can we do to make them reduce their emissions" when the facts demonstrate that they are already doing it.
If that were the case*, then why aren't we seeing a corresponding decrease in global temperatures?
*China continues to hit record high CO2 emissions. Per capita is irrelevant, as China greatly outpaces the US in total emissions. China's emissions are 1/3 of all world emissions, which is nearly 3x higher than the US. China emissions have increased 353% since 1990 whereas the US has decreased over that same time period. Every time you use the word "facts", you just dig yourself a deeper hole. But thanks for using the term "facts" so that we know what follows will be a complete lie.
whatithink
GOLD
While I hesitate to get involved in this discussion generally, it may be worth noting that the increase in emissions in China from 1990 correlates to the basic outsourcing of manufacturing to China from the Western world. So Western countries "decreasing" is probably misleading, as emissions globally were not decreasing. The emissions total (1/3 as you say) also correlates directly to the 29% of global manufacturing attributed to China.
Reducing emissions is extremely complex as its a global issue. Why should developing countries curtail their ability to develop at the behest of developed countries, who have reaped the benefits and probably screwed everything up ... if you believe that ... and who have certainly exploited all and sundry over the last couple of hundred years and who continue to exploit (via their global corps) anyone and everyone they can at every opportunity.
I don't doubt that your explanation of China's increase is plausible or even factual, but it doesn't change the substance of the problem Like you say its a global issue. We have a certain worldwide demand for products and oil. As a global community we can't live without petroleum, unless we go back to being hunter and gatherers. Based on your claim, we've just effectively outsourced some of our carbon footprint to China. We're not going to bring back our manufacturing with our regulations and costs to produce and use clean energy to do it. My point being is that there is no feasible or economic way to materially reduce emissions. The biggest impact would be going to nuclear as our primary energy source, which is never going to happen in the US, and if you believe the global warming hyperbole, all we're doing in the US is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Like Covid lockdowns, green policies are a cure that's worse than the disease. Give credit to China for embracing nuclear...along with solar...and coal.
The crux of the problem is exactly what you said in your 2nd paragraph.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Hypocrite much? My "ad hominem" was mild - certainly no worse than you stating posting here was not worth your time because it's crazy. Don't be mad cause I made fun of mask-wearing. I thought that might get a response out of you.
You ask for arguments? Where were you when I posted the graphs of carbon emissions by country and all the coal plants China is building? No comment then. Any comment on the Norway study @Desert Hound posted? No, the only thing that moves you to respond is stating that mask policy is useless. Too funny.
There's no false dichotomy when there is no other half. It's not that there can't be a climate emergency, it's that there's not one. The elite are still doing what they always do. Now some of that stuff we are doing for this non-emergency - not drilling for our own oil and not using our available natural gas comes back on those that can least afford it - just like the COVID restrictions did - and could cause emergencies. These policies weaken our position strategically making us more dependent on foreign supplies. Even if we do assume that the climate is an emergency, why on earth would we trust the people who created the border crisis and the open drug overdose, mental illness, and crime emporium that fester in our cities to solve it?
Um, you are missing my point about the "next" crisis. It's all about centralized power - "emergencies" that allow the suspension of freedom replaced by government control. The ones with the long time horizon are best because you don't have to show any results for years - but can enact draconian measures because it's "an emergency" In case you haven't noticed, our leaders haven't done a very good job of solving the problems that existed when they came into office, but have done a good job of creating new ones and making existing ones worse. Anyway, I'm afraid our relatively "short horizon" problems will overshadow any possible future climate problems in a hurry.
Parking a Suburban sucks and I don't have a bunch of people I haul around. I much prefer a smaller car. The Teslas are nice. That would be my choice for a car if I needed one now.
That was the big question 20 years ago.
Today, Chinese wind and solar installations are the largest in the world. They are considerably ahead of us in developing renewable energy.
Under half of their electricity is from fossil fuels, and it is changing quickly.
.
I don’t find it all that difficult to imagine China with an electric grid fueled entirely by wind, solar, and nuclear. They’re already most of the way there.
Now do the same analysis for USA. We’ve got work to do.
Why would you expect global temperature to decrease just because Chinese emissions have plateaued?
First, China is only 1/3 of world emissions. The other 2/3 also matters. Second, “plateau” means “still at the highest level ever.”. It’s better than “increasing like mad”, but it’s does not mean we are all done now.
If 2/3 of the world has increasing emissions and 1/3 of the world has flat emissions, then I’d expect CO2 to be rising quite quickly. (And thus global temperatures to rise more quickly than they did last year.)
You conveniently ignore the fact that China has 392 GW of coal power plants under development (enough to power Germany) vs only 97 GW of solar. So your grid fueled 100% by "clean energy" is just a fantasy and China's emissions will only continue to grow dramatically.That was the big question 20 years ago.
Today, Chinese wind and solar installations are the largest in the world. They are considerably ahead of us in developing renewable energy.
Under half of their electricity is from fossil fuels, and it is changing quickly.
.
I don’t find it all that difficult to imagine China with an electric grid fueled entirely by wind, solar, and nuclear. They’re already most of the way there.
Now do the same analysis for USA. We’ve got work to do.
I don't, I was pointing out the fallacy of Espola's argument (but I was considering the US's decline as well, so close to 50% of the emissions, not 1/3).
If you acknowledge that China has managed to shift 1/2 of their electricity production to non fossil fuel sources, then how can you claim that "there is no feasible or economic way to materially reduce emissions"?
These two claims cannot both be true. If it just happened, then it is clearly not impossible.
The US decline is mostly a shift to natural gas.
Not a bad thing, but not a long term solution either. An economy based on natural gas electricity, petroleum transportation fuels, and natural gas based fertilizer still has quite high emissions.
Desert Hound
DA
If only that were true.That was the big question 20 years ago.
Today, Chinese wind and solar installations are the largest in the world. They are considerably ahead of us in developing renewable energy.
Under half of their electricity is from fossil fuels, and it is changing quickly.
.
I don’t find it all that difficult to imagine China with an electric grid fueled entirely by wind, solar, and nuclear. They’re already most of the way there.
Now do the same analysis for USA. We’ve got work to do.
Here is the actual breakdown of China energy usage. They are nowhere close to getting 50% of their power from renewables. So no they are not ALMOST there.
Coal and gas right now make up about 80% of their energy consumption.
Desert Hound
DA
Here is a chart from 2021. 83% of energy is coal, petroleum or nat gas.
They didnt make huge changes between then and now in terms of energy breakdown.
They didnt make huge changes between then and now in terms of energy breakdown.
Huh? What part of China is adding 4x as much coal as opposed to solar (and more than all renewables combined), while setting emissions records year over year, don't you understand? Incredibly ironic that you as school teacher ignores basic math when it doesn't fit your narrative. Somehow you and Espola implausibly equate China using renewable energy to China reducing emissions. China isn't replacing coal and oil energy, they are just adding alternative energy sources into the mix.
Desert Hound
DA
"The all-renewable agenda pushed by NGOs and the Biden Administration’s EPA threatens the reliability and resilience of our electric grid. Regulators and policymakers have repeatedly warned about the looming crisis. For instance, in May, members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission delivered stark warnings to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The agency’s acting chairman, Willie Phillips, told the senators, “We face unprecedented challenges to the reliability of our nation’s electric system.” FERC Commissioner Mark Christie echoed Phillips’ warning, saying the U.S. electric grid is “heading for a very catastrophic situation in terms of reliability.” Commissioner James Danly warned of a “looming reliability crisis in our electricity markets.” Danly continued, saying that policies and subsidies “designed to promote the deployment of non-dispatchable wind and solar assets” are causing reliability concerns because the subsidies are helping “drive fossil-fuel generators out of business.”
americanmind.org
Alarm on Energy
It’s time for the Biden Administration and Congress to understand that energy security is national security.
americanmind.org
If all these efforts result in holding the line at current emission levels, that is still much more than can be removed by natural processes and will therefore result in an increase in the total CO2 in the atmosphere. The effect on global temperatures will also continue upward.