A DRAMATIC increase in US coal consumption was “by far the biggest contributor” to the overall increase in global CO2 emissions last year, a report has revealed.
US coal is Largest contributor to THE RISE… But china coal is still ‘by far’ the largest overall contributor. They write titles kinda misleadingly dramatic.
Leaving aside the importance of per capita, much of China’s emissions is western emissions in a trench coat. And I’m not saying that as a China glazer.
You can pin power use to exported products, but how that electricity is generated is chinas state decision.
It’s not like they did nothing but they could also be way more emission free than they are now.
If it wasn’t for them, oil companies would have managed to stall EVs and keep them as luxury vehicles.
China isn’t perfect but I can’t see them as the problem when they spit out solar panels while the orange moron is literally paying billions to stop renewable projects.
Yes, China is using a lot of energy in general, and not just for its export-focused economy. The Chinese middle class is huge. They are top consumers of energy in both coal and renewables.
They’ve been intentionally using coal to develop away from coal for decades. It’s been a long term strategic thing, using coal power plants to build solar panel factories, then shutting down the coal plants. Meanwhile the USA keeps using coal for fun basically, while being like “well the Chinese are using it too!”. It’s hard for me to see China as the villain here
The issue is that an increase in US coal consumption exists solely to placate Appalachians that can’t imagine a future beyond what Grandpappy did.
And it’s like, Appalachians do, in my opinion, fit the definition of “marginalized group,” but at the same time the only way of advancement that they accept is pretending the world can or should be like it was before the rust belt was the rust belt, which Republicans are happy to give them.
US coal is Largest contributor to THE RISE… But china coal is still ‘by far’ the largest overall contributor. They write titles kinda misleadingly dramatic.
Leaving aside the importance of per capita, much of China’s emissions is western emissions in a trench coat. And I’m not saying that as a China glazer.
You can pin power use to exported products, but how that electricity is generated is chinas state decision.
It’s not like they did nothing but they could also be way more emission free than they are now.
Aren’t they the number 1 in solar and new solar?
Sometimes I look at them and think, well at least they decided to do something about it.
If it wasn’t for them, oil companies would have managed to stall EVs and keep them as luxury vehicles.
China isn’t perfect but I can’t see them as the problem when they spit out solar panels while the orange moron is literally paying billions to stop renewable projects.
Yes, China is using a lot of energy in general, and not just for its export-focused economy. The Chinese middle class is huge. They are top consumers of energy in both coal and renewables.
They’ve been intentionally using coal to develop away from coal for decades. It’s been a long term strategic thing, using coal power plants to build solar panel factories, then shutting down the coal plants. Meanwhile the USA keeps using coal for fun basically, while being like “well the Chinese are using it too!”. It’s hard for me to see China as the villain here
The issue is that an increase in US coal consumption exists solely to placate Appalachians that can’t imagine a future beyond what Grandpappy did.
And it’s like, Appalachians do, in my opinion, fit the definition of “marginalized group,” but at the same time the only way of advancement that they accept is pretending the world can or should be like it was before the rust belt was the rust belt, which Republicans are happy to give them.
It’s says rise in the headline. Idk what your comment is supposed to be except for ‘china bad’ whataboutism.
I was misled upon first reading and so I wrote this to help others by changing emphasis. Their pull quote strikes me as a misdirection.
I see what you are saying but I don’t think it’s a misdirect. I think it’s the nature of fast reading. And I’m right there with you.
Or how about this - what should the headline have been?
I think it’s pretty straightforward