this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
23 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

4704 readers
609 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: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

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
silence7@slrpnk.net
23
Worries are growing in Washington that a flood of Chinese products could put new American investments in clean energy and high-tech factories at risk. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 5 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A competition to produce the machinery of decarbonization would be downright amazing

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SeikoAlpinist@slrpnk.net 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I don't have access to read the full article, but how is this a bad thing?

It seems, from the first couple of paragraphs I read, that China is flooding the market with lower cost products that are better for the environment than status quo.

Why does it matter where the come from? Is this not a net positive? Is the USA so afraid of China that they would rather have everyone spending more money, and using traditional ICE vehicles?

Again, I don't have the full article but I don't see this as a worry.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Like most of my posts to paywalled content, it's a gift link, so you have full access to it. (When I don't have a gift link, I try to post a link to an archived copy as well as the main link)

And yes, a competition to produce the machinery of decarbonization is a good thing.

[–] SeikoAlpinist@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Thanks, I see it now; it was user error as I had not enabled JavaScript for that site.

Thanks for sharing. So the US is not competitive on price and scale when it comes to EVs and solar panels, and therefore the powers that be argue that we need to actively harm US consumers through protectionist measures in order to protect business. How is that even remotely responsible?

Also, the article is critical of Chinese factories for mass producing solar panels in large quantities all the time instead of laying off employees when demand is low. I mean, this helps deliver a solution to a problem that the US fails to acknowledge. If only the US had that kind of ambition....

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 months ago

Yeah a better answer is to support scaling up US industry to make its products cheaper

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 5 points 5 months ago

Someone shared the article, so try again?

I think it's because with Capitalism every venture must have a ROI. Innovations in the US came with the assumption that the money invested by rich people will someday be worth more money.

[–] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

Well, if the experience in Germany re solar cells is any indication of how the future might play out, there are several issues:

  • global reliance on one market leads to supply bottlenecks and anti-competitive practices

  • a loss of domestic industry leads to less overall innovation, a loss of high-paying jobs and a reduction in the diversity of the industrial base

  • given the current American economy is tied to fossil fuel or adjacent industries, a failure to transition to clean industry may mean all those jobs, families, communities etc are at risk

  • development of solar in China has led to a host of quality and environmental issues in manufacturing; reversing that trend is much harder now that it is entranced than it would have been to stop at the outset.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

US, for decades and decades: keeps burning fossil fuels and kowtowing to fossil fuel industry at every turn while consumers beg for renewable energies/environmentally friendly investment

US, decades and decades later: “guys, china is investing in renewable energies! What are we supposed to do!!?!”

Fuck off. Goddammit.