1/Here is a thread about climate change that's going to make a lot of people mad. Basically, America, on its own, has a LOT power to stop climate change than almost anyone admits.https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-10-14/china-is-the-climate-change-battleground …
-
-
5/This is just a fact. But it's an uncomfortable one for a people like Americans who are used to thinking that the world lives or dies at their command. Thus, I see many Americans desperately trying to preserve the illusion of control with respect to climate change.
Show this thread -
6/The first way we Americans try to preserve the illusion of control is by bringing up moral arguments. We note that we emitted more carbon than China throughout history, and that our per capita emissions are higher. But of course the climate cares nothing for morality.
Show this thread -
7/Another way we Americans try to preserve the illusion of control is by claiming that China is doing their part, China is reducing emissions, China has the problem under control, so we just need to focus on ourselves. This is, sadly, bullshit.https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/05/30/china-co2-carbon-climate-emissions-rise-in-2018/ …
Show this thread -
8/A third way we Americans try to preserve the illusion of control is by claiming that America exports its emissions to China (by offshoring carbon-intensive industries). But in fact, this accounts for only a small piece of the rise in China's CO2 emissions.pic.twitter.com/4eeXBZh959
Show this thread -
9/Of course, I screwed this whole thread up with a typo in the first tweet, which should have read "a LOT less power" instead of "a LOT power", but let's go on.
Show this thread -
10/Another way we Americans try to preserve the illusion of control is by claiming that China will follow our lead on emissions - that if we cut emissions unilaterally, they'd follow suit. Of course, we've ALREADY cut emissions. Nobody followed our lead.
Show this thread -
11/Nor did China start slashing emissions after Kyoto, or after Paris. The idea that we Americans rule the world via our moral leadership is just another illusion of control.
Show this thread -
12/Yet another way we try to preserve the illusion of control is by making the false claim that "degrowth" in rich countries will solve the problem. In fact, China already contributes far more to global growth than we do.https://twitter.com/bopinion/status/1051242765173043200 …
Show this thread -
13/And finally, the biggest and most important way we Americans try to preserve the illusion of control is by simple denialism. Many Americans pretend that climate science is more uncertain than it really is, or that climate scientists are dishonest, etc.https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/28/opinion/climate-of-complete-certainty.html …
Show this thread -
14/It's all just an illusion. America is NOT in the driver's seat when it comes to climate change, and it's time for us to acknowledge that horrible, gut-wrenching fact. Because it is a fact.
Show this thread -
15/Does this mean America should abandon our efforts to fight climate change? Of course not!!! We should be taxing carbon, building green infrastructure, researching green energy technology, etc.!
Show this thread -
16/BUT, on our own, this won't be nearly enough. We need to do all we can to encourage China to decarbonize. This includes sharing all of our green energy tech with China, and even trying to pay them to decarbonize.pic.twitter.com/nVkquYUTAF
Show this thread -
17/It probably also includes other, less friendly and positive incentives.pic.twitter.com/rVbNtSW9a3
Show this thread -
18/But the horrible truth is, even all of these incentives probably have only a marginal ability to sway China's decisions. Like it or not, the future of our planet is in the hands of some folks in Beijing. (end)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Pretty disappointed your article didn't mention, in any context, that carbon production per capita in China is only a slight fraction of what it is in the developed world. Why shouldn't the US lead by example, and reduce its per capita production first?
-
A) I did mention it. B) The climate doesn't care about per-capita emissions, only total. C) No indication that leading by example has even the slightest effect.
-
A) I either am a really poor reader, or you buried the lede. B) True. C) Untrue. Believe it or not, the Chinese government also has a constituency; and the counter argument I hear most often from Chinese proponents of "growth first" is, why are *we* paying the cost?
-
Why did European and Japanese moral leadership (Kyoto, Paris) not sway China, then? Why does only America wield the magic wand?
-
The entire article seems oddly timed. Xi Jinping announced @ Paris that Co2 production would peak by 2030, while recent data shows Co2 has already declined the past 2-3 years. China now leads the world (by far) in investments in renewable.https://www.dw.com/en/dip-in-chinas-co2-emissions-sparks-cautious-optimism/a-44491772 …
-
A % growth in Co2 that's < % GDP growth, in Q1 after 3-4 years of decline proves.. what exactly? Xi promised in Paris to peak by 2030, and I think most observers thought that was unbelievably aggressive. If the point is, what can the US do to "motivate" China to do better...
-
... then I return to my original point. The US should rejoin Paris / Kyoto, and the developing world should also be measured on per capita emissions.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.