151–160 of 234 posts
> In 2010, Norway pledged to support Indonesia with up to 1 billion USD depending on results. It's easy to sit in a developed western country, buying products from other countries, and then complain about their emissions. I'm glad that we're trying to be responsible. It may not be enough or not the right way to do it (some thoughts on this?), but it's something.
> In 2010, Norway pledged to support Indonesia with up to 1 billion USD depending on results. It's easy to sit in a developed western country, buying products from other countries, and then complain about their emissions. I'm glad that we're trying to be responsible. It may not be enough or not the right way to do it (some thoughts on this?), but it's something.
I'm not sure how it's being protected though.
OTOH the earth has been getting greener recently:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/we-are-making-the-gl...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100201171641.h...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.
My pragmatic take is that if we keep buying their stuff - and we will - they will soon become rich enough to clean up their environment, just like all rich countries do. If you're familiar with the history of industrialism, all currently clean and rich countries went through a phase of horrible dirtiness as they rose out of awful poverty. Fortunately, China seems to go through the same steps as the west 3-5 times fas…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My pragmatic take is that if we keep buying their stuff - and we will - they will soon become rich enough to clean up their environment, just like all rich countries do. If you're familiar with the history of industrialism, all currently clean and rich countries went through a phase of horrible dirtiness as they rose out of awful poverty. Fortunately, China seems to go through the same steps as the west 3-5 times fas…
We're talking CO2 here. The US has not exactly stopped emitting as it got rich.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/10/24/yes-the-u-s-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't have to consent. That's the whole point of tariffs. They can be imposed unilaterally (As we have recently seen with the US - China shoving contest. Which, of course, had nothing to do with the environment, or carbon emissions, and everything to do with political optics.)
If the West stops trading with China then they will invade Taiwan and Okinawa and also supply modern weapon systems to North Korea.
> In 2010, Norway pledged to support Indonesia with up to 1 billion USD depending on results. It's easy to sit in a developed western country, buying products from other countries, and then complain about their emissions. I'm glad that we're trying to be responsible. It may not be enough or not the right way to do it (some thoughts on this?), but it's something.
This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.
Help me find a consumer toaster made in the United States. I searched for six months and only found ones made in China.
If I want a giant hotel toaster, there is an American option. But nothing sized for a household kitchen.
There are lots of people who make efforts to buy domestically. But so much manufacturing has gone to China that for some items there is no alternative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.
People do get that, but waiting for people to spontaneously start doing the right thing is just not a very good strategy. That's why we need a carbon tax. To force people to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
98% of Norwegian energy sector is renewables, so any way you slice it.
That seems like a questionable statistic, considering that something like 20% of Norway's GDP comes from oil and natural gas. Or by "energy sector" do you only mean the energy that is consumed domestically?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's exactly what indirect means. Only a tiny portion of this oil and gas was ever used in Norway, the rest was exported. A lot of it was used up by developing nations. Either way there were no hydrocarbon exports prior to early 1970s. Unless by "predecessors" you mean gen-x'ers.
Norway gained a lot of wealth from extracting and selling the oil. All parties in the transaction (producer, middle men, end users) "should" be carbon taxed to some degree. It's not obvious to me why you'd only want to carbon tax the consumer. Similarly, in public debate there's a lot of finger pointing at oil companies. The public can be somewhat less vocal about wanting to carbon tax the demand side of the trade, o…
Carbon footprint describes where the source of CO2 pollution is. You can make plastics from all that oil you buy or burn it all, that's on you. If you do burn it, you become CO2 pollutant, really hard to see the controversial part here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And buy products from where instead? Is everything made in China uniformally disastrous for the environment? I was under the impression the easiest way for people, who live in developed nations, to reduce emissions is to eat less meat?
FYI: "Feeding cows seaweed cuts 99% of greenhouse gas emissions from their burps, research finds" https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/cows-seaweed-metha...
That is... not exactly confidence inspiring. It may very well be a statistical fluke and the reality is much less reassuring.
Not saying we shouldn't research in that direction, but this looks way too early to be confident in it.
[1] https://animalscience.ucdavis.edu/news/research-led-ermias-k...