Posted on 06/30/2021 8:59:17 AM PDT by Olog-hai
… In 2019, China emitted 10.2 billion metric tons of CO2 — nearly twice as much as the United States (5.3 billion metric tons) — representing nearly 28% of global emissions. […]
… “If you look at only one number, you’re only getting one side of the story,” says Shyla Raghav, vice president of climate change at Conservation International, an environmental organization headquartered in the United States. To get more insight, it’s worth looking at carbon dioxide emissions per capita. […]
In the case of carbon dioxide, it is important to know that from a human perspective, the gas can remain in the atmosphere for an extremely long time: The entire decomposition process takes several hundred thousand years, according to the federal German Environment Agency. Oceans and forests can absorb some of the gas quite quickly — but an estimated 40% of the CO2 emitted by humans since 1850 has remained in the atmosphere, according to the international study Global Carbon Budget. […]
Robbie Andrew, a senior researcher at the Center for International Climate Research (CICERO) in Norway, said China began producing significant amounts of CO2 much later when compared to its historical emissions. “China’s emissions really weren’t significant. They didn’t start ramping up until about 2001 when China joined the World Trade Organization, and that gave it access to the world’s markets and that drove their economic boom, particularly focused on producing goods for exports,” said Andrew, who also participated in the Global Carbon Budget study. “There was already a problem before China came along. So, effectively, China did not create the problem.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at dw.com ...
Climate change is pseudoscience. Not real. No evidence.
The more and more I think about things, the more I think modern science is about opinion and not science
If you want to see where different types of particulates are coming from, try:
You can “drag” the earth using your mouse and if you click on the “earth” prompt near the lower-left, you can change the plot.
Garbage like this gets published to try to sway public opinion towards larger trade with Red China and away from the US.
Once it takes money from politicians, it’s politics and not science.
>>To get more insight, it’s worth looking at carbon dioxide emissions per capita.
So if Guam was number one per capita they would be a “bigger offender” than China even though the actual impact would be dwarfed by China???
I guess they’re not yet at the point of saying that CO2 coming from the West affects the atmosphere differently than CO2 coming from China.
...but we may start hearing that next year.
>> They didn’t start ramping up until about 2001 when China joined the World Trade Organization, and that gave it access to the world’s markets and that drove their economic boom, particularly focused on producing goods for exports,” said Andrew, who also participated in the Global Carbon Budget study. “There was already a problem before China came along. So, effectively, China did not create the problem.” …
They make excuses because they bow to Big China’s production capabilities.
> get more insight, it’s worth looking at carbon dioxide emissions per capita... <
What a stupid, stupid comment.
Let’s say that 10 people band together and steal $2000. By that logic, each person stole only $200. Why, that’s only a misdemeanor amount. Give them each a slap on the wrist, then let them go.
They have two main garbage arguments here, the per-capita one (to which they can ascribe absolutely nothing) and the “historical” emissions, where they claim that a majority of emitted carbon dioxide lingers in the upper atmosphere without a shred of proof or any evidence that it affects “warming” even if it did.
Per Capita: US - 16.1
Per Capita: China: 7.1
Any RATIONAL person would conclude that China has a HUGE UPSIDE when it comes to their emissions...and that us reducing, even to China’s current level, would be quickly offset by China, if they’re not ‘dealt with’.
So what’s the plan of the Leftists to deal with China if they choose to not play ball? Nuke them? If not, invade them? Maybe a blockade?
So what’s their plan for CO2 beyond shutting down the West, which is OBVIOUSLY insufficient given China alone, not to mention India and 100 or so other countries?
If anyone is struggling to figure out the answer, it means you still don’t understand the Left.
Blame all of your troubles on the person who caused them? No, blame all of your troubles on the person who threatens you the least.
“Garbage like this gets published to try to sway public opinion towards larger trade with Red China and away from the US.”
Interesting.
ChiCom united front is very active, spread deep and wide.
Two organizations are mentioned here, Conservation International, and the Center for International Climate Research.
Both of them are saying exactly what Red China would want them to say. Given that, a tough investigative journalist would look into their finances to see if they have taken any Chinese “donations”.
But unfortunately we don’t have investigative journalists anymore. Too bad.
Personally, I'm glad we're living in the Current Warming Trend (since roughly mid 19th century) and getting away from the Little Ice Age (roughly 14th century to early/mid 19th century). That's how the few people interested in climate science used to talk about global warming until political charlatans started perverting it in the 1990's.
If we're lucky we'll keep warming until it's as warm as the Roman Warm Period (2,000 years ago) or maybe even as high as the Medieval Warm Period (1,000 years ago). During the warm periods crop yields are higher, rains are more predictable, and plagues happen less often. During the cooling periods there are more wars for crop land and more slaves to work the crop land (to try to squeeze more yield from the land to counter the low crop yield effect of cooling).
Why we're not celebrating global warming is beyond me.
Just the names would indicate a connection to Red China, and to communism in general.
I remember when I visited Alaska, and then went on and on about how the Glaciers were receding due to Global Warming.
My thought was, what were the people thinking back then when they were noticing that the glaciers were advancing?
Good point!
I grew up in northern MN. Global warming is a godsend for anyone living north of, say, Chicago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.