Live data from Hacker News

China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

e360.yale.edu

241–250 of 666 posts

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Much of Europe used to be forest. It just all got whacked in the few centuries prior to today. The deforestation goes back much further than that. Europe experienced significant deforestation in the middle ages. It was a major issue for many countries long before industrialism.

Yes, all that's happened is that we declared that morality started on Apr 22 2016. Slash and burn, cut and grow. Three hundred years from now, when the result is massive prosperity we can pontificate to whomever is cutting trees then.

You're not managing to be coherent I'm afraid.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#242

I don’t know how it is in other countries, but nearly thirty years ago when I was in elementary school, a Chinese propaganda slogan stuck with me: “If you want to get rich, build roads first; have fewer children, plant more trees.” Every part of that slogan has been put into action, continuously, for decades. Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. Xi Jinping may be a…

My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I ride a Mercedes, my son rides a Land Rover, and my grandson is going to ride a Land Rover…but my great-grandson is going to have to learn Mandarin.

LOL. Probably no longer needed. China currently has no real solution for the low birth rate. I guess they are 99% relying on industrial robots and household robots(in the future).So China will desperately invest in the robotics sector. (The recently released 15th Five-Year Plan likely includes this). By then, language likely won’t be an issue—AI can replace everything.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#243
post #60

I'm starting to think that we're the baddies.

Ecologically speaking, the US is an absolute monster of a nightmare. The American carbon footprint is incredible.

You can’t look at carbon footprint in isolation. All carbon is a result of the production of something, often production which improves the state of human suffering.

What is more important is efficiency.

Otherwise the logical argument is “the US should have remained poor with more human suffering because our carbon footprint would be smaller”

That’s an insane statement

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I ride a Mercedes, my son rides a Land Rover, and my grandson is going to ride a Land Rover…but my great-grandson is going to have to learn Mandarin.

LOL. Probably no longer needed. China currently has no real solution for the low birth rate. I guess they are 99% relying on industrial robots and household robots(in the future).So China will desperately invest in the robotics sector. (The recently released 15th Five-Year Plan likely includes this). By then, language likely won’t be an issue—AI can replace everything.

Enlighten me - hasn’t Xi and the government recently demanded 2-3 children from each woman? I imagine they’ll push heavily for births again.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#246

I'm starting to think that we're the baddies.

It’s becoming very hard to see China as the adversary and not the U.S. There isn’t even a pretend moral high ground anymore.

There is the whole totalitarian human rights thing, so if you overlook that small, insignificant issue, then yeah, China is doing great!

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#247

I don’t know how it is in other countries, but nearly thirty years ago when I was in elementary school, a Chinese propaganda slogan stuck with me: “If you want to get rich, build roads first; have fewer children, plant more trees.” Every part of that slogan has been put into action, continuously, for decades. Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. Xi Jinping may be a…

My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I ride a Mercedes, my son rides a Land Rover, and my grandson is going to ride a Land Rover…but my great-grandson is going to have to learn Mandarin.

[deleted]

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, aren't coral reefs also very sensitive to climate change? How much of that loss is because of regional activities and how much is due to global environmental changes?

Considering that China is responsible for ~25% of cumulative CO2 emissions to date, there's not much difference between the regional and global inputs.

Request the source? I researched and calculated the cumulative percentage of global carbon emissions from major economies since the industrial revolution: - United States: 24% - China: 15% - Russia: 6.7% - Germany: 5.2% - United Kingdom: 4.4% - Japan: 3.8% - India: 3.5% - France: 2.2% - Canada: 1.9% - Ukraine: 1.7%

source from Global Carbon Project, is this reliable?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counter argument is that they'd have mass unemployment and would be in poverty without it. Virtually all rapid modern industrialization is reliant on exporting to foreign markets so characteizing it as American emissions is largely a misomer as it is really global emissions.

While I fundamentally disagree, do you really not see how that would then mean all Chinese emissions are therefore a result of the United States? So that's... worse?

What? No, because China is also exporting to other markets. The counterfactual is that we don't do global industrialization and let the global poor remain poor.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL. Probably no longer needed. China currently has no real solution for the low birth rate. I guess they are 99% relying on industrial robots and household robots(in the future).So China will desperately invest in the robotics sector. (The recently released 15th Five-Year Plan likely includes this). By then, language likely won’t be an issue—AI can replace everything.

Enlighten me - hasn’t Xi and the government recently demanded 2-3 children from each woman? I imagine they’ll push heavily for births again.

the government is trying to encourage more births through subsidies and other measures. In fact, experience from developed countries has already shown that this approach doesn’t work. Moreover, the subsidies the Chinese government provides are far lower than in developed countries and far below the actual cost of raising a child.

The most common nationwide subsidy is 3,600 RMB per child per year, which is basically ineffective. For a woman on maternity leave, the government will subsidize her based on her salary, which can be substantial—in places like Shanghai it could reach 200,000–300,000 RMB—but still not enough to stimulate population growth.

To put it in a darker perspective: the only way to truly boost birth rates would be to reduce women’s rights or compensation, which is unlikely in any civilized country. A historical example is Romania.

So in my understanding, China has only two viable paths: solve the cost of raising children through household robots or by means of coercion, the government could require state-owned enterprise employees and Communist Party members to have children. China has 100 million Party members and roughly tens of millions of SOE employees. SOE employees usually have stable benefits and income, so childbirth could be tied to salary, benefits, or promotion opportunities. To some extent, this could be argued as reasonable—after all, they are supported by taxpayers and arguably should contribute to society. But it still counts as a rather dark idea, and I imagine it would be a last-resort option.

Post reply on HN