For the first time in more than 150 years, Alberta's electricity is coal free

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 7:28 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #148

cm2187 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I am aware, Texas offsets the volatility of renewable with carbon based energy. Those renewable are not viable in a world with no carbon based energy. https://grid-analytics.ece.utexas.edu/chart/fuel-type-genera...

Texas would be a lot less vulnerable to such volatility if they got out of their own way and connected their grid properly to either (or both) of America's east and west grids.

Post by maxglute » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 7:44 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #147

NoLinkToMe wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada emits more Co2 per capita than China today, by 1.5x. But Co2 doesn't only count in 'last years'. It counts as a cumulative effect. The Co2 damage of Canada per capita is way beyond that of China, cumulatively. In cumulative terms, China has emitted 'only' 7.5 times as much Canada despite having 35x the population. In other words, Canada's per capita cumulative emissions are about 4.5x those of China. And that'…

Unless you're not a big fan of productions - things like food, you can't compare CO2 emissions alone. It all comes down to cost-benefit. The goal is the maximum production per unit of CO2 - for every unit of CO2 you maximize what is produced from it. Yes, the US produces 13.49% of all global CO2, but it also produces 25.22% of all output. China produces 31% of all CO2 emissions, but only 17% of all production.

Post by triceratops » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 7:48 PM UTC

maxglute wrote: post #163

refurb wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're not a big fan of productions - things like food, you can't compare CO2 emissions alone. It all comes down to cost-benefit. The goal is the maximum production per unit of CO2 - for every unit of CO2 you maximize what is produced from it. Yes, the US produces 13.49% of all global CO2, but it also produces 25.22% of all output. China produces 31% of all CO2 emissions, but only 17% of all production.

That's % share of global gdp, of which US bias services. For production, closer proxy is gross manufacturing production where PRC is 35% vs US 12%.

Post by 486sx33 » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 7:54 PM UTC

NoLinkToMe wrote: post #125

chollida1 wrote: post #74

It is frustrating as someone who lives in Canada and has spend so much money to remove coal that India and China have said FU to the world and increased their coal usage. I guess given that those two countries are keeping Russia afloat by buying their oil it shouldn't be a surprise, but its still disappointing to see those countries choosing the path they did.

Canada emits more Co2 per capita than China today, by 1.5x. But Co2 doesn't only count in 'last years'. It counts as a cumulative effect. The Co2 damage of Canada per capita is way beyond that of China, cumulatively. In cumulative terms, China has emitted 'only' 7.5 times as much Canada despite having 35x the population. In other words, Canada's per capita cumulative emissions are about 4.5x those of China. And that'…

Post by maxglute » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 7:55 PM UTC

triceratops wrote: post #165

maxglute wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's % share of global gdp, of which US bias services. For production, closer proxy is gross manufacturing production where PRC is 35% vs US 12%.

That only tells us China produces lower-margin goods. It isn't surprising that a developed country has higher labor productivity than a developing or middle-income one. Using that to decide whose carbon emissions are "fairer" is a fools errand.