its about outsourcing emissions to China, but wouldnt mind really since they are proactive about forestation and other approaches ..
this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
106 points (99.1% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5150 readers
438 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Not really; trade changes things a bit, but not that much. It's that the cost of wind and solar has come down. A lot. So people are installing a lot.
well, according to ur article, Europe is indeed a serious emissions exporter! which confirms my opinion. Who makes windmills and solar panels ? Most of the time it is China, and thats how u import emissions: by selling affordable panels. Europe making their own panels would spare the chinese more pollution, thats it.
China really dominates solar, but a lot of wind turbines are made in the US and EU
all the better: but they also have to work on reducing their emission exports too and stop being hypocrite about how much polluting china is (if thoses stats stand true ofc)
According to the experts in this video it currently takes half a year to offset the emissions related to the production and installation of wind and solar. After that its completely green energy. And solar cells last for at least 20 years.
So by purchasing from other countries you might outsource a little bit of emissions but save loads compared to running carbon-based plants.
this dude (french physicist presumably, and big promoter of nuclear) thinks otherwise:
As a panel has a 25 year life usage, we see that about half the gross production of the whole device goes to the initial energy debt linked to the production of the device. In other terms, if we want to take into account the energy spending required to manufacture the device, it’s rather 5% of France that we should cover with panels.
because i once took ur position and was confronted with this argument, and now i am confronting this arguemnt against u: nothing personal but just to get hold of facts. also was busy so i couldnt respond same-day, but i kept ur reply in mind.Lemmy is really engaging but can't let that seep into the rest of my daily-life
There's a tiny part of me that hopes we make it through, and because there's so much renewable energy available so cheaply we get the cool new tech they said atomic energy would give us.
Thank god for that, we're all saved!
This is a necessary, but not sufficient, step towards stabilizing temperatures. Cheap renewables make it possible to displace fossil fuels, but don't actually do that unless we force it to happen.
The beauty of the market system is that you do not have to force it - it will happen by itself if there are no factors (like bad laws) preventing that.
First of all you have to force it in a way of subsidizing it until it becomes cheap. Many countries did that with solar and wind for 2-3 decades now.
Then secondly there are still many laws in place or policies that support the fossil-based industries, so action is still required to u leash the full potential renewables bring to the table
The first step is already done - it became cheaper. Agree on the second step, and you t is exactly what I wrote “like bad laws” in my post.
Ah, good ole "The free market will fix everything" approach.
It has yet to work. I'm not holding my breath hoping it'll fix it anytime soon.
Free market does not fix everything, but it does work when conditions are right. That is when it is actually free as in free competition, actually market with multiple players and customers and so on.
And it is already contributing significantly into CO2 reduction - lots of private money is invested into building up green based technologies, and this will only accelerate in future.
Hmm this is assuming the oil companies behave and take it laying down
The private money invested into green technologies has a lobby too. Right now it is smaller then the oil lobby, but with green technologies becoming cheaper the industry grows and that makes them stronger. At the same time the oil industry becomes weaker.
Stuff like banning combustion engine cars are worth lobbying for, when car companies make more money with evs for example. Banning gas boilers is a great thing, for manufacturers of heat pumps as well. There is a lot more like that and it really works international as money flows international. You see that in the EU right now. Due to the energy war with Russia fossil fuels got expensive and well green technologies did not. At the same time geopolitcs made passing enviromental laws a good idea at the time as well. So right now fossil fuel is in panic mode and financing far right parties, as the status quo is not working for them anymore.
step towards stabilizing temperatures
snigger