Yeah but carbon intensive production is as direct product of FDI, which as Malm describes "relocates factories to situations where labor power is cheap and disciplined". The problem is that the second requirement for large-scale manufacturing is a large scale energy grid
-
-
Replying to @Itmechr3 @marthsshinedair and
Which means that investors allocate capital towards the most carbon intensive production because that production is at the most profitable confluence of infrastructure development and low labor costs (i.e. coal fueled production in the Pearl River Delta and Vietnamese SEZs).
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Itmechr3 @yungneocon and
This is a fair point. I concede that a lot of Chinese carbon can be traced to western demand, but I maintain that the US military is not nearly as significant as civilian and non-military industrial actors.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @marthsshinedair @Itmechr3 and
Maybe about 20% of Chinese carbon emissions come from exports...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion @marthsshinedair and
There's two problems with the "China is the largest emmiter of CO2" thing, one is that China literally has 20% more people than the US and the EU combined and it's per capita emissions are less than half of the those of the US even before you consider that 20% of those emissions
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Itmechr3 @marthsshinedair and
Sadly, the climate doesn't care about per capita emissions. Qatar has over twice the per capita emissions of the U.S., yet no one thinks that Qatar can even put a dent in climate change on its own. Only total matters, unfortunately.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion @marthsshinedair and
Look if, for example, a single person was emitting 40% of the world's CO2 this argument becomes completely absurd. It matters who emits the most greenhouse gases because bringing their levels of emissions in line with the rest of the world is the fastest way to reduce emissions
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Itmechr3 @marthsshinedair and
Not necessarily. Often that just makes coal and oil cheaper on the world market, allowing other countries to buy and burn more of it, so that their emissions replace the emissions reductions of the other countries.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion @marthsshinedair and
So you agree then that the climate change is inherently driven by market forces and that any solution requires their abolition?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Itmechr3 @marthsshinedair and
If you could establish a benevolent world government, sure, it could solve the problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But, like, I don't think that's actually possible.
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.