Slashdot Mirror


Many Nations Pin Climate Hopes On China, India As Hopes For Trump Fade (reuters.com)

Twelve readers share a Reuters report: Many countries are pinning their hopes on China and India to lead efforts to slow climate change amid a growing sense of resignation that U.S. President Donald Trump will either withdraw from a global pact or stay and play a minimal role. Delegates at the May 8-18 negotiations in Bonn on a detailed "rule book" for the 2015 Paris Agreement, the first U.N. talks since Trump took office, say there is less foreboding than when Washington last broke with global climate efforts in 2001. Trump doubts global warming has a human cause and says he will decide on a campaign threat to "cancel" the Paris Agreement, the first to bind all nations to set goals to curb emissions, after a group of Seven summit in Italy on May 26-27. "The time when one big player could affect the whole game is past," said Ronald Jumeau, climate ambassador for the Seychelles. "There would be a void without the U.S., but China and India seem to be increasing their effort." Big emitters led by China, the European Union and India have reaffirmed their commitment to Paris, which seeks to phase out greenhouse gas emissions this century by shifting to clean energies. By contrast, Trump wants to favor U.S. coal.

6 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. One word: sadness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know you have screwed things up when you have to look at China and India, two countries that have long been considered backwards when it comes to using renewable sources of energy, for a brighter tomorrow. Kudos to China and India to realize the problem and starting to get their act together. I mean, c'mon, look at India and the problems it has and it is still doing something about it. So much about us being the superior.

    1. Re:One word: sadness by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't look at it as population numbers alone, but as energy used and pollution produced per person. The U.S.A. is a problem.

      I agree that the US is an energy pig, but there are two counter points:

      1. The US is only 5% of the worlds population, so people in China and India only have to use 1/7 per capita energy of the US and already you are equally the total energy usage of the US.

      2. At some point the populations of China and India will start demanding a lifestyle equivalent to that enjoyed by people in the US. When that happens you start to get in deep shit.

      I have been saying for literally decades that the US has 5% of the worlds population but consumes 20% of the worlds energy and that when the other 95% of the world start demanding their 20% of energy, the the shit will really hit the fan.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    2. Re:One word: sadness by rhazz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Making changes in those countries will have the greatest impact overall.

      CO2 emissions per capita (2015):
      US: 16.1t
      China: 7.7t
      India: 1.9t

      The US has 4% of the population but produces 14% of the CO2. Seems to me that the US could make a pretty big impact if they stopped trying to find excuses not to.

  2. Re:The models fail: Holocene Temperature Conundrum by sdinfoserv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Climate change caused by man is accepted by 90% of scientists. The fact that a few claim otherwise is unimportant. Look at the morons who perjured themselves before congress claiming "cigarette smoking does not cause cancer". You can watch them on YouTube, and it happened in the '90's.
    There's till flat Earthers too, but thinking creatures dismiss them; just like we dismiss you. Sorry.

  3. Re:Trump version of... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Saying hopes for Trump on climate issues "fade" is implying they were ever there to begin with. Was anyone ever that uninformed to think that Trump was going to be some environmental crusader?

    If you want Trump to do anything about climate change, get behind nuclear to replace coal for base load power generation, which I'd imagine he'd support. A large number of environmentalists have, for many decades now, been hurting their own cause by blocking nuclear at every opportunity, allowing perfect to be the enemy of good.

    Of course, it won't happen, as some environmentalist would apparently rather see the apocalypse occur than build more nuke plants. Many of those people have even been going after *hydro* in recent years, which is about as clean as large-scale power generation is going to get. It weakens environmental arguments when practical solutions seem to be rejected out of hand.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  4. Re: Trump version of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems money is your primary motivating factor. That doesn't speak well of your intelligence. Your desires to deregulate would negatively impact large numbers of people, would increase sickness and death, and would increase pollution.

    Go fuck yourself.