Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 160 posts

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#111

Post by MichaelApproved »

markaius wrote: post #109
jakob223 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree about how the site should act, but in my browser (chrome on mac), it does act the right way.

Interesting, I'm using chrome on windows. One thing I also dislike, if I may keep ranting to the internet, is how much windows has fucked with their windowing system in W10. For example: I'd be playing a game and something would cause the game to hang. It happens. But in windows 10 I couldn't even alt-tab because the focus would never leave the hanging 3d area. Couldn't control + alt + delete. Couldn't Windows key +…

I'm using Chrome on windows too and it highlights normally on double/triple click. I think you either have malware on your computer or you have an extension that is... taking some extra liberties with your browser.

As with all initial debugging steps, try in incognito and see if you have the same behavior.

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#112

Post by akg_67 »

tjr225 wrote: post #58
hibikir wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treaties like this have a big signaling component, just like macroeconomics. Improvements are perfectly possible without them, but even a toothless treaty affects all kinds of decisions downstream. We also take into account that energy production is about large capital investments that aren't looking at tomorrow, but a decade or two ahead at the minimum. Building a new coal plant today isn't a bad idea because it'll…

As a current Missouri resident - I am getting the heck out of here.

You are not alone. Look into population migration numbers among states.

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#113

Post by xxgreg »

unsupak wrote: post #86

Article headline is be misleading, India is still using 54% Coal in its Energy mix. India is still the top emitter of green house gases in the world.

China 9,679.30 MtCO2e

US 6,668.79 MtCO2e

India 2,432.18 MtCO2e

2010 figures, so India will be a bit closer the US by now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#114

Post by shriphani »

orasis wrote: post #53
danbolt wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the elegance and futurism of paying with mobile phones like that, but do the telephone companies operate in a similar manner to financial institutions there? For instance, if I deposit money, do I receive interest? What happens to my funds if the phone company goes bankrupt? Are there similar regulations to banks?

When was the last time you earned a noteworthy amount of interest on a bank deposit?

Indian banks offer very good interest rates and are sort-of backed by the gov (might be wrong on this).

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#115

Post by starik36 »

threeseed wrote: post #105
jklinger410 wrote: post #74

This seems precisely timed considering how Trump backed out of the Paris agreements partially because India was allowed to build MORE coal.

Of course India was allowed to use more coal. Paris is a voluntary agreement. India, like all countries, can do whatever on earth they want. Just like Trump could've stayed in the agreement, behind the scenes done absolutely nothing for the environment (like he is now) and there would've been a lot less criticism. The fact he didn't choose this option tells you everything. It was a political decision only.

Doesn't it also stop the transfer of money from US to other countries e.g. the $100 billion annually funded by the developed nations for developing nations? If that's the case, it's not a political decision only.

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#116

Post by _ph_ »

L_Rahman wrote: post #3

Parts of the theory of disruption - specifically that an entity with less entrenched structures, can solve problems in more efficient ways - applies to nation states as well. When 25% of your country has no electricity at all, you get to imagine parts of your grid from the ground up. If there's an expectation of load-shedding and your grid doesn't have to be at a 100% in all places, you have room to make mistakes. Mo…

An important difference is also, that big power plants are huge investments, up to 1 billion $ and more, and require a large grid. Solar and wind installations can be created locally in unconnected villages and start at a few hundreds to thousands $ and can be planned dezentral.

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#117

Post by greglindahl »

djohnston wrote: post #82
greglindahl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different countries have different interest rates. While most developed countries have both inflation rates and bank deposit rates close to zero, there are a few countries with high inflation and high interest rates.

Arbitrage opportunity?

It's called the "carry trade".

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#118

Post by sumedh »

notyourwork wrote: post #57
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is an Indian worth less than an American?

Neither is worth anything if we as a society kill the planet we call home so this isn't about race or worth. It is about us as a planet deciding to keep our planet healthy. Like I said, just because one country does it doesn't make it right for others. The others should be scolding the US not following in their naive ignorant foot steps.

> The others should be scolding the US

How can other countries do that?

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#119

Post by fellellor »

tankenmate wrote: post #92
fellellor wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India imports a huge amount of coal from Australia because of local restrictions on mining, by the way. Otherwise we have one of the largest coal reserves on the planet. Digging up coal to fight climate change is just silly, and I doubt that flies anywherre.

The normal industry name for lower quality coal is "brown coal" (the most common type is lignite, which actually has a brown colour), and higher quality coal is "black coal". For coal used for steel making / coking has to be purer so low sulphur black coal is the only option.

This may be true to some extent, but a significant amount of noise was generated because of the previous government refusing to issue mining clearances for coal. I think a number of private companies had laid out infrastructure to use brown coal after the energy reforms by the Vajpayee government.

Re: India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

#120

Post by e9 »

manquer wrote: post #96
rtx wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right we shouldn't be focusing on on per capita emission.

The problem with not doing per capita is that you valuing each person differently arbitrarily basis their nationality... You can for example combine EU into one entity and say they pollute a lot. Or split china/india/US into 50 countries and say they don't contribute much individually. In effect favouring being born lucky.. in any random sample of the world population you have 33% chance of being born in just 2 count…

ok, seems like we are looking at this from different perspectives. You look at it from fairness to people and I look at it from fairness to earth. I argue that because pollution is so concentrated within the area, it destroys that part of earth more, this does not include anything to do with fairness towards people. But you are absolutely right if you look at it from perspective of being fair towards people. I am not at all against helping people though, I totally support destroying parts of the environment if it reduces overall suffering and progresses wellbeing of individuals in need. But my initial argument was that, social issues aside, looking specifically from environmental impact, per capita is not a good way to judge impact of the country.
Post reply on HN