Why shouldn’t the US remove as much carbon as it added? Seems pretty obvious ethics if you treat carbon as a negative externatility of private production benefits.
the Party is focused on “historic” rather than actual emissions because this is a religious discussion, not a strategy session. the purpose is not to stop or correct global warming, the purpose is to sacrifice and repent.https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1449161393387749379 …
-
-
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Be on the lookout for 'minority' to vanish and be replaced with 'historically marginalized groups' or similar.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
If I was China I'd be pretty happy that hair-shirted western activists are focusing on historic emissions and "Climate Justice"... Indeed I'd probably be actively encouraging it. Really actively.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
If we only consider instantaneous emissions the logical thing any developing nation will do is roll coal to maximize industrialization and then transition to a clean economy and blame the guy who is one step behind. Anyway, the climate cares more about aggregate emissions.
-
Ultimately, we can react with outrage that other nations are also burning fossil fuels to get to where we are, just like we did, but it’s not going to do anything. Because they want the lives we have and they just won’t listen. Not an accusation of hypocrisy. Just unawareness.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
The only thing that matters here is total atmospheric CO2 levels. Until we have massive public works to reduce them, we're in an increasingly worse spot. Agreed the focus on historic emissions is unhelpful, but let's make sure we focus on what matters before thinking we're good.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Completely agree. Though one question this raises would be who is consuming the drivers of these emissions in China... just because we off-shored our industry doesn't absolve us. No idea what that looks like but do think it's an important question.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
How much in historical emissions did the US expel making sure China didn’t start speaking Japanese?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Agree. If it was about anything else they would talk about it like budget cuts: "We cut emissions 30% this year!" You mean instead of the expected 10% increase it only increased 7%? Yes! A 30% reduction!
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.