141–150 of 666 posts
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.
Canada has added 20 million acres, India 22 million acres, Russia 52 million acres - an area about the size of Kansas.
This and Bill Gates saying... > “the doomsday outlook [on climate change] is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world.” I guess it's cool there's something to be hopeful about, westerner's just seemed excited to make money off of melting ice in Greenland.
India too has been adding more green cover than ever. Higher CO2 in atmosphere leads to faster growth of forests. But more important factor is urbanization for India. As people move to cities the need to cut down trees goes down.
You'll read about some 70 year old woman/man in an obscure village who's reforested thousands of acres on their own, or resuscitated a lake (e.g. the lake guy in Bengaluru).
But there's little effort to harness their knowledge in a systematic way, add knowledge from others into the knowledge bank, do peer review, and then systematically dispense the knowledge in the form of a kit to environmentalists and bureaucrats across the country. China did this, and that's why they're so successful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe the rest of the world should stop doing their manufacturing in china.
It's called China, not china.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-s...
Meanwhile we're speedrunning DustBowl 2.0 just in time for its 100th anniversary.
China isn't following a particularly unique path, they just did a speedrun of economic development - they had nearly everyone living in extreme poverty in the 1980s. Before long, they'll be looking for cheap markets to outsource manufacturing and extractive industries to... which is why they're lending money to forgotten African nations. Keeping Russia an international pariah and making them economically dependent on China is probably up their alley too.
Canada has added 20 million acres, India 22 million acres, Russia 52 million acres - an area about the size of Kansas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell everyone what their per capita emission is? While you're at it, compare that with the US per capita emissions. Also let us know the accumulated emissions for China and US in the last 50 years. Thanks.
The earth doesn't give a shit about per capita, and us and eu are net reducing CO2 emissions since 2014 (even during trump I)
Indonesia: 275M / 650M ton / 2.3 ton
Pakistan: 240M / 225M ton / 1 ton
Nigeria: 220M / 110M ton / 0.5 ton
Brazil: 215M / 475M ton / 2.2 ton
I can go on and on about the countries that are emitting less than the US. People and animals live in areas that are liveable. So countries near the equator and fertile countries will always be more populous. So how else do you propose we compare countries? Which are themselves mostly arbitrary lines as far as the earth is concerned - so why chunk by countries? It has to be per person right?