posted in Technology
US coal ‘biggest contributor by far’ to rise in global emissions
www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/us-coal-biggest-contributor-by-far-to-rise-in-global-emissions/
Replying to @Mustachius_Grumpius@thelemmy.club
From the article: “Make no mistake: China is still by far the biggest CO2 emitter in the world” in absolute terms, Law stressed.
Replying to @How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
It’s also the biggest country in the world by population, by far. That’s not really indicative of anything. China is also decarbonizing at an absolutely incredible rate, whereas the US are basically doing everything they can to increase their emissions.
Replying to @Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
ourworldindata.org/…/annual-co2-emissions-per-cou…
The US has been decreasing emissions for 20 years now. While China, as of 2024, was still exponentially increasing emissions.
cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-coun…
Same with per capita emissions. The US has been cutting per capita emissions for 20 years, while China is still increasing.
Replying to @Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
The US has been cutting per capita emissions for 20 years, while China is still increasing.
But they haven’t caught US yet!
United States: The average American emits roughly 14 to 15 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.
China: The average Chinese citizen emits about 8.7 to 9.2 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Next question: what’s the average CO2 emission per capita of Billionaires?
A billionaire’s total average carbon footprint is roughly 1.9 million to 3 million metric tons of (CO_{2}) equivalent ((CO_{2}e)) per year.
So, Billionaire’s income ratio is around 500,000:1 of an average US citizen, but their CO2 emissions are only about 170,000x - that makes Billionaires almost 3x greener with their greenbacks than an SUV commuting wage slave.
Replying to @MangoCats@feddit.it
I mean, sure. But the atmosphere and climate aren’t going to care about per capita emissions. Total emissions are what matter.
Replying to @Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
So, is it easier to change the behavior of 3500 people who can do whatever they want, 340 million people most of whom have some choices in their lifestyle, or 1.4 billion people of whom about half are just doing what it takes to survive?
Replying to @MangoCats@feddit.it
“Easy” is irrelevant. The climate doesn’t care about which is easier.
The simple fact is that China accounts for 1/3 of total global emissions. If the US went completely carbon neutral today, global emissions would be cut from 38.6 Billion tons to… 33.7 Billion tons.
If China went completely carbon neutral we’d drop from 38.6 Billion tons to 26.3 Billion.
Everyone needs to cut their emissions. China is actively doing the most damage to the climate, however.
If Elon musk contributed 90% as much as all of Germany would you be equally happy saying Germany’s 80 million people held more responsibility than Musk for their emissions? Per capita is the only measure that makes sense as it is how much each person is contributing.
Another way of looking at it, Yunnan creates far less CO2 than the USA so by your logic the USA is worse than it. Repeat for every other Chinese province.