Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You are downvoted for apparant racism.

The western world, of about 500 million people, pollute 4x more than China which has 1.2B people.




European Union: 6.4 tCO2 per capita per year

China: 7.5

And EU is about 500 million people.

Source: 2014 numbers from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/en.atm.co2e.pc


All that stuff the EU and US buys - where's it made?

It counts toward China's emissions total. Whilst having reduced EU or US contribution comparatively speaking. We globalised manufacturing emissions, and most of them ended up in China.

The simple fact is no one can claim their halo - everyone, everywhere has a part in the solution, and we can find failings to criticise everywhere too.

Maybe Orkney got closest to their get out of jail card, but they're tiny.


> All that stuff the EU and US buys - where's it made?

Not that I disagree, but it is not just Europeans' choice to buy from China, but also Chineses' choice not to sell.


The western world, of about 500 million people

How did you get to that number? EU is about 500 million people, The US and Canada is about 350, Add in any other countries you might consider 'western' and that's another 50-100 million.


> apparant racism.

By people who apparently don't even know the meaning of the word.

> The western world, of about 500 million people, pollute 4x more than China which has 1.2B people.

The western world has a much larger population, but I'd like to see you back that claim up with reproducible numbers.

It's a fact that CO2 emissions in China are growing rapidly (per capita and absolutely) while the "western world" is mostly reducing them and has been doing that for many years. Also, we have to rely on China's "official data", which may or may not be correct.


> It's a fact that CO2 emissions in China are growing rapidly (per capita and absolutely) while the "western world" is mostly reducing them and has been doing that for many years.

If it's a fact you should be able to cite a source?

> Also, we have to rely on China's "official data", which may or may not be correct.

The rest of the world is more than capable of monitoring China's emissions using satellite data.


> CO2 emissions in China are growing rapidly

China rapidly tripled their emissions from 2000 to 2010, but after 2011 they have hardly increased at all.

Second graph here: https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-chinas-co2-emissions-...


> Now let us return to why the reported Chinese CO2 emissions growth in the communique is so much lower than our projection in the 2018 Global Carbon Budget. The real reason is not clear, but the problem is an unexplained inconsistency in the coal statistics in the communique. [...] >There is no apparent explanation for these discrepancies. Some people have suggested that China’s statistics bureau is manipulating the data to make coal consumption growth look smoother than it actually is, although there is no direct evidence for this. Whatever the case, the discrepancy over coal means that overall CO2 growth could be as high as around 4% – compared to 2.3% reported in the communique – even before accounting for other sources of uncertainty that we usually include in our analyses. Those factors push the uncertainty range even wider, to -0.4% to +6.7%. ...


https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/

Report dated 30 Nov 2018

"China is positioning itself as a global climate leader, and its actions have an enormous impact on global greenhouse gas emissions. Discouragingly, a rise in coal consumption drove Chinese CO2 emissions to a new high in 2017, which will likely be exceeded again in 2018."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: