undefined | Better HN

0 pointstriceratops1y ago0 comments

Anyone can spin total emissions to suit whatever agenda they want to push. They're the world biggest emitter but that's just lines on a map. If they were 10 separate countries it wouldn't be the biggest emitter. But those emissions would still be there.

China literally produces the most solar panels, electric cars, and batteries by far. In 2022 83% of new electricity generation in China was renewable (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42037497). That doesn't scream a country that "doesn't care".

They might be building a lot of new coal plants, but they aren't actually using them more than they already did (see above). Why would they waste their coal? They build more solar panels than they know what to do with, the sun is free, and they don't have NIMBY groups holding up construction.

0 comments

caminante1y ago

> emissions would still be there

Except not.

See this research showing that their domestic demand (ex-energy transition exports) is still massive and growing [0].

You're not alone as many on HN seem to have this misconception about greenwashing. The reality is different.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42805218

triceratopsOP1y ago

You misunderstood my comment. I'm not talking about emissions due to exports or emissions due to building green tech.

I'm saying the people who live there would emit the same amount whether they were 10 countries or 1. "China bad because total emissions" only comes up because they're 1 country.

> their domestic [energy] demand is still massive and growing

Of course that will happen as they develop their economy and improve their standard of living. But most of the new energy generation - 83% in 2022 - coming online is all renewable.

Would you suggest they don't develop, and remain poor? They'd be justified in saying "You first, rich Westerner". People in gigantic SUVs shouldn't throw stones at people in electric cars.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse