• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Where do you think all your shit is produced exactly genius. The biggest climate change threat are mouth breathers living in the west who consume more energy per capita than anywhere else in the world.

    • Skua@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      China is on par with the EU for consumption-based emissions per capita these days. Better per capita than the US still, but the direction of travel for both is narrowing that gap over time

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s factually wrong, US, Canada, and lots of nordic countries have far higher per capita consumption. Meanwhile, the transition from fossils at China is happening at a far more rapid pace than in the west. The gap is actually growing over time.

        • Skua@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Your link shows exactly what I said. EU and China close together, US way above. Go to the chart view and you can pick the EU as a single entity, plus you get the change over time.

          Of course, what I actually said was not “energy usage”. I said consumption-based emissions. You can get those here and you’ll see that the slim gap between the EU and China vanishes altogether, plus the direction of travel changes. Energy consumption alone does not account for the way that that energy is being generated, something which seems pretty pertinent considering the article we’re commenting under.

            • Skua@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay? I’m sure it would vary significantly across different parts of China too, or across different parts of any individual country. I chose the EU as a whole because then we’re dealing with an entity on a similar scale to China, and a much closer approximation of “the west” than any one country of five-ten million people.

              You’ve completely failed to respond to the fact that energy consumption does not directly correlate with emissions. If you’re using twice as much energy as me but you’re getting it all from solar panels and I’m getting it all from burning coal, which one of us is doing more harm to the environment?

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                What the map clearly shows is that the highest consumption in China is on part with the lowest consumption in EU. I’m not sure why you’re having so much trouble with this to be honest.

                Meanwhile, the reason to focus on energy consumption is because it’s far more meaningful than focusing on emissions. EU countries are largely deinudstrialized and they import much of the necessities from places like China. This creates a skewed picture of emissions because EU outsources much of the emissions needed for EU to operate to other countries.

                And last I checked burning increasingly more coal is precisely what EU is doing. In fact, Germany is even dismantling wind farms to create more coal plants https://euobserver.com/green-economy/157364

                • Skua@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What the map clearly shows is that the highest consumption in China is on part with the lowest consumption in EU

                  The map shows the average across all of China. There is no breakdown of any national subdivisions. Where are you getting figures for the highest consumption in China?

                  it’s far more meaningful than focusing on emissions.

                  Why? Energy consumption is not what’s damaging the environment. Emissions are.

                  EU countries are largely deinudstrialized and they import much of the necessities from places like China.

                  I used consumption-based emissions specifically to account for the balance of imports. Please, at least actually read what I said.

                  And last I checked burning increasingly more coal is precisely what EU is doing. In fact, Germany is even dismantling wind farms to create more coal plants euobserver.com/green-economy/157364

                  Again, you’re looking at one part of a much larger entity and ignoring the broader picture. While I do not want to see Germany, or anyone else, opening new coal mines, single-digit numbers of wind turbines are not going to save the day here.

                  In 2022, Germany burnt 28 petajoules of coal per million people, whereas China burnt 62 petajoules of coal per million. Values here for Germany and China, divided by populations taken from wikipedia. You’ll also notice that Germany’s consumption is trending down, while China’s isn’t.

                  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    10
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The map shows the average across all of China. There is no breakdown of any national subdivisions. Where are you getting figures for the highest consumption in China?

                    Once again, averaged out usage per capita across China is on par with averaged out with poorest parts of Europe. Meanwhile, usage in wealth European countries, is far higher.

                    Why? Energy consumption is not what’s damaging the environment. Emissions are.

                    In case you weren’t aware, emissions are a byproduct of energy production.

                    I used consumption-based emissions specifically to account for the balance of imports. Please, at least actually read what I said.

                    You’re complaining that I didn’t reply to stuff you edited in after I replied to you?

                    In 2022, Germany burnt 28 petajoules of coal per million people, whereas China burnt 62 petajoules of coal per million. Values here for Germany and China, divided by populations taken from wikipedia. You’ll also notice that Germany’s consumption is trending down, while China’s isn’t.

                    You’re once again setting up a disingenuous argument here. Germany started with high consumption of coal, but then started getting cheap gas from Russia which is what allowed Germany to start phasing out coal. Now that US blew up the pipelines, Germany is starting to go back to coal.

                    Meanwhile, China has a clear plan for transitioning off fossils that’s being actively implemented as we speak. Coal usage in China has been found to be perfectly inline with the plan. It’s also worth noting that China has consistently manged to be ahead of the targets that it set. On the other hand, Europe is nowhere close to pursuing a meaningful transition.

        • Fizz@mastodon.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          @NoneOfUrBusiness @yogthos @bioemerl they don’t have a point. They absolutely hang off per captia emissions stats because it’s the only way they can dismiss the extreme damage China is doing to the environment. Having more population doesn’t allow you to pollute more. That output still harms the earth all the same.

          Majority of the west is trending towards less emissions where as China is increasing emissions exponentially year on year.

          • bioemerl@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The main thing I think is important in regards to China and the environment is that China explicitly opted to open up areas that subverted all of our pollution controls and ability to regulate industry, undervalued our labor, and generally fucked up progress for a solid decade, and they’re going to continue to do that for a decade yet.

            I’m not super prone to blame China for the pollution because they have a lot of people and they have to feed and give those people stuff.

            But I will happily blame them for everything in paragraph one.

            I left my comments because it’s important to know when a bunch of shills for Stalin and mao are running around regardless of the validity of what they have to say, because whatever’s coming out of their mouth is almost certainly propaganda.

          • Pili@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s so stupid. Of course more people will mean more pollution. You’re not making any sense, please try to think 5 minutes before posting.