China is largest greenhouse gas emmiter now

[Glasnost 3]

Yep I'm in Beijing, China NOW. the pollution are surprisingly bad compare to the place that I used to live (Peoria). Blue sky appears only after rain (which don't happen that often) and people are trapped in the hot, wet, particulately air in the city.

I may want to come back to Peoria if only for a breath. HOOO HOOO HOOO!

[Barbarossa 51]

MrFingersThen we can start castrating Al Gore and Co.quote>

Yet more secret love for Al Gore. Really, you mention him everywhere... creepy.

(If you don't know why I say 'more', go to the Global Warming thread, LOL.)

Barbarossa

[Micah 16]

Can we lay off the Al Gore jokes? I'm just trying to avoid a flame from the calm water.

[Sticksboi05 2]

Originally posted by: Ryusuke516

Originally posted by: newy2 

It's pretty scary when you think bout it ay? China isn't a developed country and is the largest gas emmiter. Just imagine when Chinas gas emissions per capita is as high as developed countries like the US

Developed countries are already having problems cutting down their own emissions, imagine  how much harder its gonna be to reduce emissions from booming countries like china and India that need resources to fuel their rapid growing economy.quote>

China is the 3rd MOST DEVELOPED contry on earth. The U.S. is under developed compared to CHina. China is one of the MOST technologically advanced countries. The U.S. would be the biggest greenhouse gas emiter if it was as developed as China. In terms of capita, they are one of the least polluting contries on earth. The U.S. is nowhere close to being as developed, China is at least 10 times MORE developed than the U.S.

The above message was edited for rudeness and to make the quotes work -- Skiquote>

Wow, that's some ignorance right there.  Really....

[Sirithil 1]

Well, here's something to consider.

I think we can all agree that economic activity as we know it causes CO2 emissions, yes? You drive your car, you buy your factory-produced stuff, you fly on a plane, whatever, there's a 'carbon footprint' attached to it, as the Goracle would call it.

So it stands to reason, then, that if we're trying to measure who is the largest polluter, we shouldn't be measuring it on a per capita basis. We should be measuring it on emissions per unit of economic output. If economic output is the direct cause of pollution, then clearly in determining who's the dirtiest, that's what we should be linking it to.

Oh, wait, suddenly, the United States goes *white* on that pretty map from a couple pages back. When emissions are compared to the economic output that produces them the United States is among the cleanest nations on the planet.

So... uh... why exactly are we measuring pollution output on a per capita basis? Same reason we don't compare it to the economy: because it flies in the face of the blame-America-first agenda of most of the environmental establishment and more than a few people in this thread.

Now let's continue the thought experiment. Why would I say such a thing? Surely these people have the greatest intentions for the planet. They just want a better world for our descendants.

Not so fast. We're told that climate change is the greatest threat to human survival. It's drilled into our heads every single day. Like someone said a few pages back, 'you turn on CNN or CBS and it's like the world will blow up tomorrow.' Al Gore claims that sea levels will rise twenty to forty feet by 2050. Well, this sounds horrible! Surely we should prevent this at any cost, right? If this is the greatest possible threat to human survival... then the gloves need to come off in stopping it.

Well, let's build giant-ass nuclear power plants everywhere. No more coal and oil fired plants! Big friggin' nukes. In every town, village, and city in the country. It's clean. It produces zero emissions. It pumps out whacking great lots of energy. When run by competent people instead of Soviets, it's safe as houses, too. And the waste? Would you be surprised if I told you 97% of it could be recycled and shoved right back into the reactor? Well what about what's left? Isn't it lethal forever? Well, no. Let me introduce you to a little concept called 'half-life'. In time period x, the radiation drops by half. In time period 2x, by three quarters. And so on. Inside a decade nuclear waste is literally less radioactive than the rocks it was originally mined from (due to a much shorter half-life). Why can't we do this? The French did it. 80% of their energy comes from nukes.

Yet, every nuclear power proposal meets with a storm of 'green' opposition. Odd... I thought global warming was the greatest threat to mankind. Surely that's worth producing a little bit of glowy stuff that one can dump under a mountain a jillion miles from everything or something. But, I guess not. So I suppose global warming is the greatest threat to mankind, except for the one single technological solution we have today that feasibly has more than a snowball's chance in hell of dramatically reducing... global warming.

So... why would they make this claim? Could it be their intentions aren't as driven-snow pure as they insist? Could it be their real desire is to economically cripple the very same nation they incessantly seek to blame, that beacon of capitalism and individual liberty, the United States of America?

Discuss.

[saltandsauce 0]

Australia is just as bad as the U.S for that stupid suburbia crap britiain gets its oil from norway not russia that is why we have to pay more because we don't get the russian stuff america buys russian oil

[JanYpe 17]

Say what?

[BurroDiablo 222]

I pretty much agree with everything Sirithil just said... its funny that everybody is so paranoid about Meltdowns that we'd rather drown in an extra 50ft of sea water than replace our Coal firing plants with Nuclear energy.

It never occurred to anyone in Greenpeace that Chernobyl was human error? It was an experiment that went horribly wrong, the reactor didn't just explode on its own accord.

You know... to Replace even a few of the UK's Nuclear plants would require 22,000 turbines... and an area 8 times the size of Glagow. And unless their going to build all those turbines out at Sea, I don't look forward to living in a Turbine city. There wouldn't be these kind of problems if we just built Nuclear Power stations, I honestly could care if the built one next to my house... my confindence in Nuclear is huge and I don't know why these idiots in Government can't beat back all the protesting hippies and just build them everywhere.

They say building 10 Nuclear power stations would only lower CO2 by 4% in the UK... but think of it this way... if you build LARGER Power Stations with massive outputs like the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Japan wich produces enough to Power 16 million homes then building even 6 of these could power the whole country! You got to be really stupid to acctually throw away possibilities like these...

[screamingman12 30]

Originally posted by: El Burro I pretty much agree with everything Sirithil just said... its funny that everybody is so paranoid about Meltdowns that we'd rather drown in an extra 50ft of sea water than replace our Coal firing plants with Nuclear energy.

It never occurred to anyone in Greenpeace that Chernobyl was human error? It was an experiment that went horribly wrong, the reactor didn't just explode on its own accord.

You know... to Replace even a few of the UK's Nuclear plants would require 22,000 turbines... and an area 8 times the size of Glagow. And unless their going to build all those turbines out at Sea, I don't look forward to living in a Turbine city. There wouldn't be these kind of problems if we just built Nuclear Power stations, I honestly could care if the built one next to my house... my confindence in Nuclear is huge and I don't know why these idiots in Government can't beat back all the protesting hippies and just build them everywhere.

They say building 10 Nuclear power stations would only lower CO2 by 4% in the UK... but think of it this way... if you build LARGER Power Stations with massive outputs like the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Japan wich produces enough to Power 16 million homes then building even 6 of these could power the whole country! You got to be really stupid to acctually throw away possibilities like these...quote>

Enough said.

[Goldfish4209 9]

Note how China has more than 4 times the people than the US. If the US lived like China, then we would have far less problems...

[coolotter88 2]

heh, i'm in beijing too and I can confirm that blue sky really does appear only after rain....and not always. out of all the time i've been there, I have only seen 5-6 days of clear blue sky.

[BurroDiablo 222]

Originally posted by: Goldfish4209 Note how China has more than 4 times the people than the US. If the US lived like China, then we would have far less problems...quote>

All those Freeways jammed up with Bicycles... now that would be a sight to behold

[JDRCRASH 53]

China will continue to grow rapidly overall for at least another century.

The only real reason why China is still booming is because of its labor.

It will therefore become 5 times bigger economically than America.

However, the United States is growing in population faster than China, and some experts predict that the previous projection of 400 million Americans in 2040 is greatly underestimated.

[Micah 16]

However, the United States is growing in population faster than China, and some experts predict that the previous projection of 400 million Americans in 2040 is greatly underestimated. quote>

That's largely due to immigration.

I personally don't think the boom will be that long. Maybe a decade or so. Its politcal persecutions and religious persecutions cannot be sustained forever with a population in the billions. It wouldn't even surprise me if we had a boom of Chinese immigrants in the next few decades.

[coolotter88 2]

everyone's pretty happy in china...at least the people I meet are. I highly doubt that their eager to leave for the United States.

anyway, it would be freeways jammed with buses...there are like 900 bus lines in beijing xP

[Micah 16]

everyone's pretty happy in china...at least the people I meet are.quote>

Mainly the people in the cities are happy. The cities are a very very small part of China.

I personally know a women who escaped the Chinese persecution (her name is Ms. Cho... not related to VT). She has been imprisoned 3 times and she tells me that that's the side of China you never see. The greenhouse gas problems are only a small problem in China. Sure, the cities are amazing in China. Shanghai is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, in my opinion. However, the cities show only a small part of China.

If the majority of people there were happy, I wouldn't understand why they almost have a negative immigration rate (emigration?). I truly wish we had more Chinese viewership and membership on this website, but unfortunately most aren't permitted to have access to the Internet.

[IDS2 3,396]

You guys...China is the developing country, not the US. The US is a developed country, contrary to what some of you may think, but it's there, in the news, and you can tell from everyday. People are hardly allowed to leave China.

[hamsterTK 93]

I think its just growing pains and maybe its not entirely fair to blame them, since we buy their crap after all

the most recently developed comparable place, Japan, may have invented the kyoto protocol. But they were the kings of pollution once upon a time...

[noahdiehl 0]

Yeah, it's really bad....but all I can think of is what is going to happen to the people breathing that crap in 50 years from now...if they are not carefull China will truly choke it's self to death.....or thay will all die of cancer....either I really don't see it changing anytime soon and it's really sad to watch.

[DeiBellum 0]

Heres a little fun fact.

Did you know that if you were to line up everyone in china in a single file line, and started a head count from the beginning, That the head count would never end due to the rate of reproduction?

Also nowadays scientist are almost at a breakthrough with solar technology which would allow solar panels to capture the entire spectrum of the Suns Light waves. Also Energy companies are investing in HUGE wind farms in the ocean by the cost since there is almost a constant breeze.

[coolotter88 2]

yeah, I believe everything was made in japan before everything was made in china.

[dscampbell 181]

It is totally rediculous to compare chinas greenhouse gas emitions to that of other countries. It is just as rediculous as calling the chinese economy the third largest in the world. Figures like these should be compared to the number of people in the area. For instance. China may have surpassed Germany in terms of ABSOLUTE economy size, but relativly the chinese economy per member of the population is closer to that of a third world country still. Remember that 99% of the Chinese live in absolute poor conditions.

The same goes for greenhouse gas emitions: Chinas emitions per m ember of the population is far less than that of Europe, and even more so than that of the USA (which is still the largest greenhouse gas emitor per member of the population)

These are the facts and theONLY wright way to compare figures like these. ANY discussion based on absolute figures is TOTAL ( ;-) ) [Ahem.]

[noahdiehl 0]

GOOD POINT dscampbell! How easily we forget about the numbers game.

[spacemanspiff 0]

Right on dscampbell. Here's another thought to chew on.

Comparing China's industrial explosion to the industrial revolution in the West bears out several key differences. While the West had it's revolution, they learned their lesson. pollution, Labor, and a variety of other things were unacceptable, and changes were made through social action. There is no such thing as social action in China. It's a communist nation. Simtropolis is most likely banned there simply because this thread exists. Whereas people were the tools of a million businesses in the West, China's population is the tool of ONE government.

Even the very nature of the pollution is different. Western pollution is heavily regulated, and (relatively) evenly distributed in a geographical sense. China's population and pollution is heavily concentrated along the southern and SE coast, and completely lacks adequate regulation. Substances that are banned in the west, are commonplace in China, so it's not just about Carbon, but about large quantities of serious toxins in a compact area.

Change in China is not likely.

Sorry if I repeated anything that may have been said before.

[coolotter88 2]

no it's not

[JDRCRASH 53]

It actually seems almost astronomically impossible for China to pollute now more than America, because only two years ago, when Al Gore realeased "An Inconvenient Truth", The United States produced much more emissions than China.

[crazyyaya 4]

Now your going to get coolotter88 started on An Inconvient Truth.

[coolotter88 2]

what? you misremembered.

[autoVino 26]

Originally posted by: DeiBellum Also nowadays scientist are almost at a breakthrough with solar technology which would allow solar panels to capture the entire spectrum of the Suns Light waves. Also Energy companies are investing in HUGE wind farms in the ocean by the cost since there is almost a constant breeze.quote>

 

Why not invest in nuclear technology?  Pretty safe and efficient.  Solar panels are expensive, and Huge wind farms will be costy to maintain.  Why not build a few huge nuclear power plants to power countries (okay, I admit that only a few will most likely be too little, but you get my point)?

[Micah 16]

You could build a solar panel farm in orbit (as the Pentagon is looking into). All you have to do is send the energy via microwave, radio wave, etc. If I can find the article on Space.com, I'll be sure to post it.