China has worked enormously to make clean energy more affordable, has dramatically overhauled its energy production (and is continuing to do so), and is fighting desertification atvrapid speeds. The EU on the other hand may be internally more green by ratio, but per capita consumes far more than China. This is because the EU relies on exploiting the global south for its consumption due to imperialism, the actual net impact of the EU is negative. The actual climate gains have largely come from China.
China has a high per captia co2 emissions than the EU by a significant margin. For all the “good” they’ve done in renewables they’ve done just as much damage expanding their non renewable power. Its sad that you fall for such obvious greenwashing I thought people of lemmy were more inteligent than that. The anti desertification is pretty much DOA since China is already struggling with water and the forest is artificial and monocultured. They’ve cut down forests to build factories, they zone factories to close to residential areas leading to cities with some of the lowest air quality in the world. They dont rotate crops and destory the soil nutrients, they dam up every river destroying downstream ecosystems, they pollute water systems that feel into their own villages. To act like they build solar panels out of a car for the environment is naive. They made the choice to ignore global efforts to reduce emissions should everyone be allowed to do that?
You’re looking at total emissions within the EU vs. total emissions within China compared to their respective populations. This is, frankly, a ridiculous way to look at emissions, considering neither country produces everything it consumes (though China is far closer). The EU has lower emissions per capita because it doesn’t produce much, and instead relies on imperialism and neocolonialism, importing much of what it consumes with little regard for environmental protections from the countries it consumes from. The actual net impact of a European is far higher than someone in China.
It’s odd that you accuse me of "greenwashing,* when you’re falling hook, line, and sinker for it. The EU pretends to be green by erasing the fact that it consumes far more per capita, with far worse of an environmental impact. It’s as simple as that. China’s expansion of non-renewables pales in comparison to its rising rates of green energy and electrification. China’s air quality is likewise rising rapidly. We do not live in 2004 any longer, yet your information comes straight from those eras.
It isn’t China that’s ignoring green initiatives, it’s the EU pretending like they care while still operating on imperialism and neocolonialism.
Yes, “per capita” going by total emissions within the respective countries and dividing it by the populace, not actually taking into account consumption and where that comes from. It’s incredibly ironic that you call correctly analyzing the greenwashing and imperialist apologia you did “cope” without engaging with any of what I said.
China has worked enormously to make clean energy more affordable, has dramatically overhauled its energy production (and is continuing to do so), and is fighting desertification atvrapid speeds. The EU on the other hand may be internally more green by ratio, but per capita consumes far more than China. This is because the EU relies on exploiting the global south for its consumption due to imperialism, the actual net impact of the EU is negative. The actual climate gains have largely come from China.
China has a high per captia co2 emissions than the EU by a significant margin. For all the “good” they’ve done in renewables they’ve done just as much damage expanding their non renewable power. Its sad that you fall for such obvious greenwashing I thought people of lemmy were more inteligent than that. The anti desertification is pretty much DOA since China is already struggling with water and the forest is artificial and monocultured. They’ve cut down forests to build factories, they zone factories to close to residential areas leading to cities with some of the lowest air quality in the world. They dont rotate crops and destory the soil nutrients, they dam up every river destroying downstream ecosystems, they pollute water systems that feel into their own villages. To act like they build solar panels out of a car for the environment is naive. They made the choice to ignore global efforts to reduce emissions should everyone be allowed to do that?
You’re looking at total emissions within the EU vs. total emissions within China compared to their respective populations. This is, frankly, a ridiculous way to look at emissions, considering neither country produces everything it consumes (though China is far closer). The EU has lower emissions per capita because it doesn’t produce much, and instead relies on imperialism and neocolonialism, importing much of what it consumes with little regard for environmental protections from the countries it consumes from. The actual net impact of a European is far higher than someone in China.
It’s odd that you accuse me of "greenwashing,* when you’re falling hook, line, and sinker for it. The EU pretends to be green by erasing the fact that it consumes far more per capita, with far worse of an environmental impact. It’s as simple as that. China’s expansion of non-renewables pales in comparison to its rising rates of green energy and electrification. China’s air quality is likewise rising rapidly. We do not live in 2004 any longer, yet your information comes straight from those eras.
It isn’t China that’s ignoring green initiatives, it’s the EU pretending like they care while still operating on imperialism and neocolonialism.
No im looking at the per captia stat. Everything you said is cope
Yes, “per capita” going by total emissions within the respective countries and dividing it by the populace, not actually taking into account consumption and where that comes from. It’s incredibly ironic that you call correctly analyzing the greenwashing and imperialist apologia you did “cope” without engaging with any of what I said.