Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
China Earth

China's Emissions Now Exceed All the Developed World's Combined (bnnbloomberg.ca) 293

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: China's emissions of six heat-trapping gases, including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, rose to 14.09 billion tons of CO2 equivalent in 2019, edging out the total of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development members by about 30 million tons, according to the New York-based climate research group. The massive scale of China's emissions highlights the importance of President Xi Jinping's drive to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and reach net-zero by 2060. China accounted for 27 percent of global emissions. The U.S., the second biggest emitter, contributed 11 percent while India for the first time surpassed the European Union with about 6.6 percent of the global total. Still, China also has the world's largest population, so its per capita emissions remain far less than those of the U.S. And on a historical basis, OECD members are still the world's biggest warming culprits, having pumped four times more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than China since 1750.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China's Emissions Now Exceed All the Developed World's Combined

Comments Filter:
  • by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Thursday May 06, 2021 @11:42PM (#61357282)

    China is now the big problem, and in 2 decades India will be most the rest of the problem. All other nations won't matter at all.

    • by Third Position ( 1725934 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @12:10AM (#61357344)

      And somehow, America will still get blamed. By the usual suspects.

      • by tolkenda ( 6851282 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @12:13AM (#61357356)

        The usual suspects meaning people who understand that most of the rest of the world effectively outsources its manufacturing to China, buys all their shit from China, and then points the finger at China for daring to have so many factories making stuff? Those usual suspects?

        • The point is China has a government, a central place of control for emissions, resources, manufacturing. That's how the real world works. It matters what China decides for carbon emissions more than anything else. Soon India will also be with China on deciding about carbon emissions. the problem is China.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Joce640k ( 829181 )

        And somehow, America will still get blamed. By the usual suspects.

        Two things:
        a) "Per capita"
        b) Setting a good example for others to follow.
        c) Glass houses.

        • by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @05:52AM (#61357916)

          And somehow, America will still get blamed. By the usual suspects.

          Two things: a) "Per capita" b) Setting a good example for others to follow. c) Glass houses.

          That's three things. Regardless, I raise with a royal flush:

          d) Trends.

          No matter how you want to ignore it, numbers matter. I cannot explain nor dismiss the amount of ignorance it takes to assume that this isn't or won't become a China/India problem. Two countries hold damn near 40% of the human population. The rest of the planet could become a solar powered green oasis. It wouldn't matter and it won't matter unless we address who are and will likely be the emissions problem from this point forward.

          That's not racist. That's not xeonphobic. That's fact. You don't ignore 38% of a problem and assume it will all go away. And right now, the planet is that glass house, so let's drop the lame analogies. This, is a human problem to solve. It just happens to be assigned to each country. because we carved this planet up that way. We are all guilty, and those who are less guilty than others are still going to pay the price unless we solve for all.

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            We set the trend. We developed a lifestyle that is very comfortable, but also emits way too much CO2 to be sustainable. So arguably this is a Western problem, in that we need to come up with a better way of living sustainably that sets the expectation for developing nations.

            • We also set the trend for recycling, competent waste management and an ever-increasing reduction of energy usage and replacement and we lead the world in CO2 reduction [hollandsentinel.com], but those don't generate the angst required by complainers.
        • US residents contribute about 1/3 more to the global economy per-capita-emission-ton, last I checked.

          That your "two things" list is 3 items long suggests how seriously your opinion should be taken anyway.

        • Wrong, China has a government. That government controls emissions. The predicable "per-capita" you autists bark when triggered goes out the windows. China is the problem.

          Stupid to say we need to inconvenience ourselves to be "good example", that has no effect whatsover on China's policies and actions. China is the problem. Soon India will be the problem. India has a government too. You need to dial down your autism knob and realize "symbolism over substance" is a waste of time.

          "Glass houses" is even m

        • A. Only total output is actually relevant. Per cap output is not.

          B. Even if I accepted that meant anything in this context, what the hell example do you think is being set? That it's good to take the blame for China's mess? Bull.

          C. If you think there is any kind of moral equivalence between the US, (or OECD nations generally) and China, in any way, shape or form, you're smoking crack and talking crap.

        • Which two?
      • Yeah, but by then will it be China's world, and the US (and everyone else) will just be living in it?
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Because America set the bar for the kind of lifestyle people aspire to. If China ever reached the per-capita emissions of the United States we would really be screwed.

        Therefore it is very important that we find a way to enjoy a high standard of living without emitting so much CO2. Show that it's possible and preferable, and use our markets to drive technology in that direction.

      • by ranton ( 36917 )

        And somehow, America will still get blamed. By the usual suspects.

        Of course any country which emits over twice as much as the average country per capita (and 5 times as much historically) is going to be seen as a major source of the problem. And any country with 24% of the world's GDP is going to be seen as the biggest driver of change worldwide. When the wealthiest country is also historically the largest greenhouse emitter, it arguably becomes that country's responsibility to do the lion's share of the work in solving the problem.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

      China is now the big problem, and in 2 decades India will be most the rest of the problem. All other nations won't matter at all.

      Is it? The world doesn't give a shit where it's silly inhabitants drew arbitrary lines to divide people based on some name. If you look to individuals in that area they are far less polluting than we are in the west.

      But hey it's far easier to point the blame at the total emissions of 1bn people than to admit that the horribly wasteful practices are done back home. But yay our arbitrary line only has 1/3rd of the number of people inside of it. High five bro!

      • by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @09:31AM (#61358410)

        Your argument falls apart because China has a government, a central control over the carbon pollution. Thus, inhabitants' "arbitrary lines" are very relevant.

        You spew nonsense that sounds good to yourself but which doesn't stand up to logic and reason. China is the problem, China has a government that rules over the people and resources in those "arbitrary lines".

      • When the US and Europe first started building power plants over a hundred years ago, nobody knew their byproducts would be a problem. By the time anyone did, we were burning carbon everywhere. We didn't know short smokestacks would cause problems, we didn't know how to reduce polluting output, we didn't have alternatives to burning carbon or know we'd want them. China isn't starting with only the knowledge and technology we had when we started, they have the advantage of a century of research and innovat
    • by ranton ( 36917 )

      China is now the big problem, and in 2 decades India will be most the rest of the problem. All other nations won't matter at all.

      China and India make up 36.3% of the world's population. 10 years ago it was 36.8% of the population, so trends aren't showing that percentage is increasing. So while the way in which these countries become developed countries will have a huge impact on global greenhouse emissions, the other 64% of the world certainly matters.

      The primary goal is do everything we can to ensure Asia doesn't follow in the west's footsteps. If China produces as much greenhouse gasses as the US per capita, they would increase gl

  • Well duh (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday May 06, 2021 @11:51PM (#61357308)
    They make all our stuff. We explicitly outsourced manufacturing there so we could have high profit consumer goods without polluting our own cities.
    • Re: Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by e3m4n ( 947977 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @12:11AM (#61357352)
      Low cost consumer goods. Its not high profit. The profit would be the same. Have you never wondered why, when adjusted for inflation, we pay prices a quarter of what they would have been if they were still manufactured here? Some things are actually cheaper now, in todays dollars, than they were 30 years ago in those dollars. CPI index adjustment alone, it could never stay or drop in price, even if you froze wages for 30 years. No it wasnt to increase profits. It was to hide the fact that wages have been growing slower than housing markets increase, and subsequent living costs increase. By making the shit stay dirt cheap your spending power has the illusion of wage growth. If consumer cost were to increase they way it would have, all of us would be working 2 jobs just to have 2 nickels to rub together. Thats the ugly truth of all of it.
      • by Ichijo ( 607641 )

        Have you never wondered why, when adjusted for inflation, we pay prices a quarter of what they would have been if they were still manufactured here?

        Because it's all disposable now, and unrepairable, and crippled with DRM.

    • Re:Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @02:46AM (#61357588)

      Actually, in large part outsourcing was done because China offered great incentives to many industries that were being penalized by insistence of Green movement in the West at the same time.

      Truly, who could've predicted that if you make manufacturing things like solar panels production chain extremely difficult and expensive with various environmental regulations, all while China offers massive benefits if you just your entire production and supply chain to China, manufacturers wouldn't just move and instead stay and make really expensive solar panels in the West.

      And before you screech about your ignorance and how there's a couple of companies that do in fact do final assembly in some Western nations, stop and research what goes into making solar panels and where that happens. Including those with "made in USA/EU" stamps on them. Hint: A lot of things that goes into them is no longer mined, refined nor processed in the West.

      And same applies to countless products, from all but most expensive steel grades to many electronic components.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        It was cascade failure. To make stuff you need supply chains. Raw materials to components to modules to products. If any part of the domestic chain fails you have to outsource it.

        Parts of the chain became uncompetitive in our countries, and it started a cascade of failures where it then didn't make sense to import say components when you could just build the whole module where the components come from.

        That's also why reversing it will take a very long time, and be quite difficult to do. Probably not worth d

  • Halt progress (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @01:23AM (#61357478)
    So, judging by some of the pro-US comments here, what they want is for Chinese people to stop their economic development. American individuals have some divine right to be the biggest polluters, and everyone else must live in poverty.
    • Yeah well it's the first mover principle. Kings also express some divine right to rule the peasants despite not having actually done anything worthy of their status. The "I got mine, fuck everyone else" principle is very much at play here. Equality is not for everyone.

      And that my friend is precisely why we as a species are ... to use the technical term ... fucked.

  • "Net zero by 2060" (Score:2, Informative)

    by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

    Last I checked, "net zero by 2060" was about using coal for power generation. Specifically, using domestically sourced Chinese coal.

    Reason for it is not sudden explosion of environmentalism in Chinese Communist Party. It's that by current estimates, Chinese domestic coal reserves will run out by approximately 2060.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      No, it's net zero CO2 emissions.

      Makes great economic sense, emission reducing technology is in demand already and demand will only continue to increase as more and more countries set net zero goals. It's also becoming essential for China because other countries are including CO2 emitted there as part of the manufacturing process when calculating things like lifetime emissions of products, and if say Europe gets much further ahead it will move manufacturing there.

      • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

        Totally. If you're a baizuo as Chinese call your types.

        For people who are anchored in reality on the other hand, they just take the production fleeing nations that are increasingly influenced by such types as those types act on it by sabotaging their own industry. Like Chinese have done for last few decades, which is how they ended up with lion's share of West's manufacturing and production capacity.

        As for "but other countries will calculate emissions", remind me, who is it that sets all those numbers and g

    • Last I checked, "net zero by 2060" was about using coal for power generation.

      Did you get that from Fox News? If you try and look at other news sources you may find that since China instead has the largest number of solar installations in the world approximately 1/3rd of the entire world's supply. The largest number of wind farms. They've recently kicked off projects to make 1.1 TWh of battery storage for the grid so they can expand renewables more which represents a capacity several times the entire rest of the world combined, and this was done because their wind developments were a

  • by gadb2 ( 7465360 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @03:08AM (#61357624)
    So, yeah, China needs to take some heat over their pollution, but... Much like the traditional crooked fund manager citing performance over the past 5 years, conveniently ignoring the 25% loss that occurred the year before, lets not forget the west has been pumping crap into the atmosphere for hundreds of years and accruing the benefits to their economies. Now pointing the finger at China looks very much like "I'm alright Jack, pull the ladder up.". Let's look at aggregate pollutants released over the past 200 years instead of just the last year. Now who looks like the bad citizen? If we wanted to be _fair_ and ask China (and other nations that started industrialising after us) to delay it's economic development to protect the environment, we'd agree to compensate them for the pollutants we pumped out while developing. But we don't do that, we just ignore our past - conveniently, like the hustling fund manager - and point the finger. Pretty much par for the course.
  • by fleeped ( 1945926 ) on Friday May 07, 2021 @03:35AM (#61357676)

    If you don't like that they don't give a shit about emissions, stop doing business with them that results in said emissions, unless you get guarantees about emissions, and send regulators (yeah right). That includes factories, bitcoins etc. Don't point your fingers at them while sitting on your made in china chair, wearing made in china clothes looking at a monitor made in china etc.

    Outsourcing work should not result in "outsourced emissions are not by me", otherwise those emission numbers would be very very different.

  • Now we can look forward to the times of great plenty similar to the 14th C.

    Just don't think about the bubonic plague which followed the subsequent cold period.

    • Per Capita is one of the better KPI s if it can be measured. There will be cheaters but high level directional there should be a global price. Yes rich get to consume more but should pay for privilege. No idea how such a system could be effectively setup and managed. Skeptical but starts with discussions and negotiations.

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Working...