Holy shit, will an angry vendetta of child abuser Trump actually bring around a faster transition to green energy in the rest of the world??
post
The group of 60 states that discuss the fossil fuel phase out as described in the linked article formed during the latest COP last year in Brazil as the majority of governments refused to commit to an end of fossil fuels. China and the US, both among the world's largest polluters in total as well as per capita, are among these countries. They have no interest in a fossil fuel phase out.
Surprised to see Nigeria on that list. Are they going to produce it, but not consume it?
China doesn't care because they will manufacture rooftop windmills if that's a catchy thing. They properly follow the money.
i dislike things about China's government, but the one thing you can't say about them is "they're incompetent"
addressing climate change is the only competent money making proposition if you look at the big picture
You definitely can make a case that they are as well. The main reason they are looking so good is the US is smoking meth and causing chaos.
Covid, their property market, youth unemployment,huge emissions growth and the many major industrial disasters. The insane mishandling of natural disasters like floods, remember the government officials that opened the upstream dam without any warning and flooded a tunnel during bumper to bumper rush hour. Oh and the genocide they're carrying out.
I'm not sure how much of this makes it to the world news but these were all huge news events for the Asia pacific region.
sorry yes. that's on me. these are all issues i have with china's government. they are ultimately a ruling class that exists to enrich an oligarchy. all of these things are bad. from my american perspective, they are bad for evil reasons, not for incompetence reasons. these are all desirable policy choices for the Chinese state.
it's just my government is both evil and incompetent.
This should have been happening 40 years ago, but now is better than never
That sort of happened. The IPCC was founded in 1988 for example. The issue is that it so far has not worked. Going smaller scale to develop some stronger treaties might help though. Especially if it includes some enforcement mechanism and punishments for countries, that do not go along. Like say carbon tairffs for example.
It's funny. I'm watching big tech companies that pushed for AI currently clambering to catch up to open source improvements to that tech. Why would you go with them when there's free, open, better options? They seem to have shit their beds and it keeps getting worse and worse.
And I can't help but watch Trump's obsession with oil rapidly accelerate USA's slow impending doom of keeping all the eggs in their fossil fuel industry and dependency.
is it obsession or source of bribe? he's getting paid by oil tycoons for this push, in my humble opinion
A coalition of the willing. Maybe it will have a more positive effect than the hijacked COP.
tbh this is a bad headline, this meeting group was put together specifically because the cop got hijacked, not because of iran fuel prices
The title is a bit misleading as there are only around 60 democratic states that meet to discuss fossil fuel exit. The majority of governments, including the the world's biggest polluters, are missing, particularly China and the US.
The world needs to catch up to China on renewable energy not the other way around.
China, the world's biggest polluter, is among the countries that refused to join the group aiming to phase out fossil fuels.
China manufactures the most goods though... by a lot, and that's going to be pollution intensive. They are a pretty populated country as well.
US, oil producing countries, Europe are generally a lot worse than China on a per capita consumption basis.
The group of 60 states that discuss the fossil fuel phase out as described in the linked article formed during the latest COP last year in Brazil as the majority of governments refused to commit to an end of fossil fuels. China and the US were among these countries.
US, oil producing countries, Europe are generally a lot worse than China on a per capita consumption basis.
If we look at the CO₂ emissions per capita of the world’s top 30 economies by GDP, China sits at number 9 with 8.7 tons per year and person (in 2024). This is more than double the global average and more than any European country except Russia.
China's climate action's are also highly insufficient, including against the country's fair share regarding its National Determined Contributions (NDCs). It's not that Europe is on track to achieve the Paris goals, but it's much better than China.
Despite a rise in renewable energy investments, coal has re-emerged as an ongoing force in China’s power system in recent years for a variety of reasons, and this is also clearly embedded in Beijing’s recently released new 15th Five-Year Plan.
It's time that Europe revives its own renewable energy industry. Environmental laws regarding production and consumption are much stronger in Europe than in China, and so it is better for Europe from a security point of view.
I should clarify, im not trying to let China off the hook.
But production based CO2 per capita is not the only metric. Europe (for example) has outsourced dirty production to China, so they look clean, but it's people in Europe consuming the products China is producing, so it should be on their ledger.
If you look at CO2 from a consumption basis China falls down the list below Europe.
Now... I suppose consumption based metrics better align with peoples behaviors (ie Europeans are more damaging to the environment than Chinese on average).
On the other hand, production metrics point to European countries having stricter environmental policies than China. which to be fair is what you are highlighting. I'm trying to say, yes, but China is manufacturing way more for other countries.
Stricter policies is part of what pushed manufacturing out (and labour costs). Easier to do when you are a service economy.
The US have accelerated the rise of China, all to make Israel happy
You could not make this shit up
It's bittersweet because it just reinforces that our economy holds greater value than our survival.
Though, to be fair, we do seem to be a species that only takes reactive action. So climate change would never get resolved until it's full-swing fucking most of us over, at which point it'll be too late for most of us since it's basically there already.
The title is a bit misleading as there are only around 60 democratic states that meet to discuss fossil fuel exit. The majority of governments, including the the world's biggest polluters, are missing, particularly China and the US.
Most of the Asian countries and others are racing towards the use of renewables, faster than most western nations. The Iran war has at least sped up our planets pace of change. No doubt the big oil companies will fund whatever they need to get the best returns

all 3 comments