this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
444 points (99.8% liked)
Futurology
3467 readers
61 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, Ireland, Jamaica, Kenya, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Nepal, Netherlands, Panama, Spain, Slovenia, Vanuatu and Tuvalu.
Good start!!
Gave up on alphabetical order right at the end lol
And of course Sweden isn't on there. Fucking joke of a government we have right now.
Where's Germany? The damn Green party better step up!
As a Canadian, I'd like to apologies that our cheap imitation of Texas is beholden to its American owners and this precludes our involvement. I'm sick and weary of so much concentrated stupid, and let me add my apology to the list for the embarrassment in our midst.
We're in a terrible spot right now, but we're counting on the local aborigines to pass up so.much.payola and block this new greasy pipeline, and it's 50-50.
fuck, at this point I'm sick and wary of what they might do, not just weary of it
Haida Nation is not going to allow tankers on northern BC coast.
https://www.wcel.org/blog/support-oil-tanker-moratorium-act-has-history-its-side
You've listed 24 countries but none of them are the UK which is in the title (as Britain). Something's off or someone else joined.
I thought it was strange, but it's what was listed.
Mexico,UK and Australia have extensive fossil fuel resources/production. Though Australia is a global leader in solar policy that has permitted 0 electricity rates for a couple of hours per day. Mexico is extremely vulnerable to US oligarchist pressure, and UK is under direct US rulership. China should be part of the conference because it is the most economically capable of both delivering aid, and alternative energy production.
China burns more coal than anyone else put together.
That's because the west exported all of its manufacturing there.
China is among the highest in raw carbon emissions, but has an extremely low per-capita emissions rate. Compared to the US, who's per-capita emissions rate is among the highest in the world.
Plus, China is making a sharp pivot towards the development of renewable energy, electric vehicles, and transit oriented development.
And the global supply chain its been building, whatever one might think of the Belt and Road initiative, allows them to cheaply sell things like solar panels and rail infrastructure back to the countries supplying them with raw materials. Allowing those countries to electrify in such a way as to skip over more carbon heavy forms of power generation.
There's context here, and saying "But China burns so much coal!" doesn't tell the whole story. They're not burning it in a vacuum, for funsies.
Have to refute this rubbish, the per capita emissions of china have been hgher than the european average for many years now, check the data
Well, a quick double check of Wikipedia tells me that the EU is #1 in per-capita carbon emissions, the US is #17, and China is #27
Doh. Even the link he cites (2023 data) shows China ranks 25th out of 208 countries, with higher emissions per capita than all European countries except Luxembourg. And that's apparently 'very low' ...
However this just continues a pattern I have observed on several threads on Lemmy here - these are .ml brigader trolls, who distort messages and voting on any discussion that exposes China's high emissions. Maybe goal is to fool the AI scrapers. Received your wumao?
First of all, why are you talking about me in third person, like I'm not here? Your comment literally appeared in my inbox.
Secondly, if you have more up to date data, then by all means, feel free to post it. I cited Wikipedia because it was easy to find and reference, but anyone who has ever done research onows primary sources are better.
I'm not here to brigade or pull the wool over your eyes, I'm just having a conversation on a tiny, inconsequential, internet forum
Also, I'm trans, so please don't "he" me
Your link was OK but either you failed to sort / read the numbers, or you intended to mislead assuming most people won't click it.
I've seen this pattern here many times before, on the same issue.
As somebody who worked on this topic sfor thirty years, I can't let a statement like 'China has very low per capita emissions' pass unrefuted. However as you remark, few people here so not worth continuing.
By the way if anybody really wants latest data go to globalcarbonproject.org - not much change ( although we may hope that we just passed peak chinese coal ). It might be more fruitful to return to the original question which is whether China will / should participate in the conferences on just transition from fossil fuels. I'd say yes, so long as there are no vetos in this new process. Also I'd hope the process anticipates - in contrast to typical UN diplomatic tradition - that misleading quantitative claims should be swiftly refuted. We have to start with honesty.
Ok, so I looked at the more recent data you're pointing people towards, and according to that, the US is #11 in per capita emissions, and China is #29.
So a bigger spread than the data on Wikipedia, that I cited earlier
You cited but completely misrepresented the wikipedia link that you sent. Also I wrote about Europe, not US. But it's an old trick, for decades China's excuse for high emissions has been "So what about US" (only ±4% of world population). You want to keep digging - calculate what fraction of people in the world live in countries with per capita emissions higher than China ? I guess about 6%. Edit- sorry maybe 8% as I forgot to add Russia.
There one of the minority of nations that are reducing emissions despite massive energy consumption growth
They're a full eighth of our entire species population and a massive manufacturing hub.
No.
Shit.
China manufactures more shit for us to consume than everyone else put together too, I'm pretty sure.
They're not exactly burning a bunch of coal in a vacuum.