I know what you mean, I get the feeling she is smiling and trying to hide itShe irritates me... her heart is in the right place though.
The DOD is 55th, China is 1st. So if we add the DOD to the rest of the western world's emissions China would still out pollute the western nations 5.975 to 1."A recent study from Brown University’s Costs of War project surfaced this startling fact: The U.S. Department of Defense has a larger annual carbon footprint than most countries on earth. With a sprawling network of bases and logistics networks, the U.S. military is the single biggest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world aside from whole nation-states themselves. “Indeed, the DOD is the world’s largest institutional user of petroleum and correspondingly, the single largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world,” the report notes. If the Pentagon were a country, it would be the world’s 55th biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. And its main purpose — warfare — is easily its most carbon-intensive activity. Since the present era of American conflicts began with the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the U.S. military is estimated to have emitted a staggering 1.2 billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere. For comparison, the entire annual carbon emissions of the United Kingdom is roughly 360 million tons."
Extracted from an article originally published in The Intercept dated September 15, 2019 entitled: "WAR ON THE WORLD Industrialized Militaries Are a Bigger Part of the Climate Emergency Than You Know"
Lots of what they produce is for the West though. This is probably also a big part of the reason why they have been given more time to decarbonise, apart from being a 'developing' country.The DOD is 55th, China is 1st. So if we add the DOD to the rest of the western world's emissions China would still out pollute the western nations 5.975 to 1.
That's a fair point. But they are the largest builders and users of coal-fired electric generating plants on the planet. Even if they installed stack scrubbers, it would still be problematic. The other thing to consider is the deforestation of the world's rainforests. If you decimate the largest areas of CO2 conversion on the planet's surface what is going to happen? You are going to see an increase in greenhouse gases.Lots of what they produce is for the West though. This is probably also a big part of the reason why they have been given more time to decarbonise, apart from being a 'developing' country.
She suffers with Aspergers syndrome -- that's why she may come across a little odd.I know what you mean, I get the feeling she is smiling and trying to hide it
White middle aged man here... (yep I fit that demographic) but I don't side with the white middle aged men who hold all the power. Im all for telling them things need to change... but shouting at them telling them things need to change without having any answers is like pissing in the wind. The whole cult around her seems very well orchestrated and stage managed but has it had any effect... a lot of middle aged men nodding their heads agreeing with her then doing absolutely bugger all about it once she has exited stage left.
Agreed.She suffers with Aspergers syndrome -- that's why she may come across a little odd.
Her heart's in the right place, her message is very, very valid ... and I admire her for at her age to do what she started -- seeing that it's her generation and her kids generation that'll be really facing the dire consequences of climate change.
LOL yep.She does in particular rub up white middle aged and older men up the wrong way it seems (as proven here again )
Yeah, it sucks. I remember when the kids were small we always bought Canadian made clothing whenever we could. If we couldn't we'd buy US and if we couldn't we'd go for Mexico. As time went on there was less and less available to the point where finally we couldn't keep to North American at all.BTW: you can't boycott China anymore -- they basically just about make ALL your stuff....LOL.
You're right, but it is a sticky point, since nobody can force China (or the USA for that matter) to do anything. The Paris Agreement is built completely on voluntary national ambitions. And this is why Thunberg's jeers and sneers against world leaders are not really aimed at them. She knows they won't actually listen to her, even though some may pretend to. She is really speaking to her own audience - mostly young people who are or soon will be voters. And in that way, I think she has a very big influence.Hey, I am all for saving the environment. But if it’s a global problem then global solutions need to be uniformly applied. So China needs to adhere to the Paris Accords at the level the west does. And so does everyone else for that matter.