[pstrateman]

The simple reality is that humanity is unable to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without an alternative that is superior.

For every ton of CO2 that the west has reduced in the past decade China has produced three tons of CO2.[1]

We need another breakthrough on the scale of the Haber process.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?country=OWID_WRL~Hi...

[Aachen]

Why present an opinion as a fact ("simple reality that we're unable")?

I agree if you opine that the high income countries won't adequately do it, and the low/middle income countries have bigger problems, but it is a choice (and mainly our choice, if I'm not mistaken about HN's predominant NA+EU demographic)

I'm not sure most high-income people (globally speaking, so like the richest ~billion) are consciously making that choice, or at minimum aren't aware of the cost-benefit situation. Pretending there is no choice doesn't seem like the right way to go about this, considering that every euro spent on prevention significantly outweighs adaptation options

[pstrateman]

It's not the high income countries choice.

If you reduce your consumption the cost of oil will fall towards the cost of production and middle/low income countries would consume it.

The only way someone in a high income country can prevent this is to buy oil and permanently bury it.

[ClumsyPilot]

> every ton of CO2 that the west has reduced in the past decade China has produced three tons of CO2.

This is a really bad statement.

Reason 3:

This year China installed more renewables than the rest of the world combined [1]. In China, 50% of new cars are electric. Their per/person emissions is much less than USA. Meanwhile, we are putting up tariffs on Chinese EVs, etc.

Instead of blaming them, realise that they are taking climate change seriously and we are not.

Reason 2:

Look at your graph, ‘we’ have like 15% reduction in CO2. You could divide by any growing economy and the result is the same, because we suck at ‘our job’.

Reason 1;

Lastly, we outsourced our emissions by moving production to China and then importing the products. That’s not much of achievement.

[1] https://globalenergymonitor.org/report/china-continues-to-le...

[thegrim33]

>> Instead of blaming them, realise that they are taking climate change seriously and we are not.

China's annual CO2 emmissions have been exponentially increasing for the last 50 years and are currently nearly three times as high as the US's and continuing to exponentially increase. There has been zero decrease in emissions over the last 50 years, only increase.

The US's annual CO2 emissions have been linearly decreasing every year for the last 20 years and is now a third of China's.

How is your conclusion to this that China is taking it seriously and the US isn't? https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-metrics

[croes]

Because we shifted our production to other countries.

Lots of their CO2 is because of us.

[chanakya]

The effect of the shifting is minor. China's exports (to all countries, not just the US) make only a small difference to their emissions growth.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption...

[vivekd]

I think that's the sane opinion, we haven't reduced emissions, we don't have the ability to reasonably reduce emissions at this time. But we can look at available solutions and make what incremental progress we can and cheer on and celebrate the progress that has been made while encouraging more.

But I don't think societies elites (the highest educated portion of the population) has taken the same perspective. I think they've instead chosen to approach humanity (themselves excepted of course) as evil, greedy stupid and belligerent and have taken a hostile attitude to most human and human endeavours (especially commercial ones)

Wanting to do something about climate change is great. Salivating over human suffering or insulting or looking down on people outside of your elite circle for not doing or caring more...

Whatever it is I think it's an even bigger problem than climate change. The rhetoric of the climate movement is disturbing. We can't progress as a species when a large portion of a our species hates us, looks down on us, and wants thd worst for us

When did the climate change movement become the anti human movement? is this just a politically correct way of attacking poor and less educated people

[roncesvalles]

Two words — nuclear energy.

[benchmarkist]

Technology is not going to get us out of this mess.

[xbmcuser]

I was of the same opinion till last year actually still am as I think the world has passed the point of no return when it comes to global warming.

But the tech is there just not the political will or finances as it hurts economies and people's chances of winning elections.

China is likely to hit it's peak oil because of ev's and peak coal in the next 2-3 years because of renewables and batteries. Although China is mostly going electric for economic and energy security reasons it will be interesting to see what happens when it is no longer using carbon based energy for it's growth.

[IshKebab]

Probably nothing will get us out of this mess, but technology is really the only thing that can help. Solar power, wind power, electric cars, heat pumps. All technology. All helping.

[pfisch]

Seems like we could deflect 1% of sunlight with existing technology. I don't get why we aren't doing this.

We are already terraforming the globe, so we might as well do it intentionally.

[newsclues]

What is? Depopulation?

[yieldcrv]

In time

[Freedom2]

I disagree. If anything, a YC-funded company will get us out of this mess.

[pstrateman]

If you truly believe that then the options for what happens are universally bad.