Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EclecticKant t1_izsy5cy wrote

Reply to comment by SansSanctity in [OC] Yearly Average Temperature in the UK, 1884 - 2021 by PieChartPirate

Drastically? The CO2 emissions per Capita have been reduced by less than a quarter in the last 30 years. And the total emissions are almost at an all time high.

A few developed countries have reduced significantly their emissions, mostly the Eu, but the USA is not one of them, the only reductions are caused by an increased efficiency in the technology used, definitely not because of efficient climate policies or a shift in the public opinion on the matter.

The USA is the richest country on earth by far, and it's doing nothing, and the problem is not that people wouldn't be able to heat their homes or fuel their cars, there is plenty of wealth to spare, but people just don't care enough, even though doing something is in their best interest, but it doesn't benefit them in the short term

0

SansSanctity t1_izsygg6 wrote

I was talking about total emissions, which are down, not at an all-time high.

5

EclecticKant t1_izt064x wrote

https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/

We are 20% down from the all time high. Basically the same level of the eighties. Is this what you would describe as "drastically reduced"?

1

SansSanctity t1_izt0fyt wrote

Why did you describe a 20% reduction from the ATH in the 1980s as " the total emissions are almost at an all-time high."?

7

EclecticKant t1_izt1l7x wrote

Mostly because they have started to increase again. My point still stands, emissions aren't being reduced, not nearly enough to have any meaningful impact on our effect of climate change.

What about your point? How can you describe people's opinions as "unscientific catastrophizing" when your opinion is based on wrong facts

−2

SansSanctity t1_izt1sim wrote

I stated that we are trending down over the last 20 years. You’re the one with “wrong facts” who said we are at an all time high.

2

EclecticKant t1_izt7fda wrote

"ALMOST at an all time high" seems more fitting than "drastically reduced" when referring to a 20% reduction.

Your initial argument is that the USA "drastically" reduced emissions without harming the poorest part of the population, and my point is that it is simply not true. The USA produces the same emissions that it did 50 years ago, does it seem enough to you? The USA hasn't suffered from climate change policies because it has not put in place any meaningful climate policy.

2

fjccommish t1_iztbmts wrote

Reduced is reduced.

−1

EclecticKant t1_iztgl78 wrote

And drastically means Nothing.

Praising the US policis for such a small reduction is ridiculous and pointless.

1

fjccommish t1_izvamly wrote

Turn off your computer. Stop driving. Turn off your electric appliances. Show us the way.

0

EclecticKant t1_izw7j6c wrote

The only options are a 20% reduction or returning to the bronze age?

Following the same path of the EU would be more than enough, and probably more than anyone expects or asks from the USA, the EU produces roughly half the tons of Co2 both per Capita and per dollar of value produced compared to the US. And the US is probably richer than the average European country, so the lack of money is probably not the problem.

1

fjccommish t1_izy6rvt wrote

I agree. You first.

1

EclecticKant t1_izy75bn wrote

I'm European. I already went first.

1

fjccommish t1_izyjszh wrote

What have YOU done that you are demanding Americans do to stop fake global warming?

1

EclecticKant t1_j014bwk wrote

Pollute less?

1

fjccommish t1_j03020n wrote

What have I polluted?

1

EclecticKant t1_j030qka wrote

16 tons of co2 each year, on average.

1

fjccommish t1_j0369fq wrote

CO2 isn't a pollutant. Plants need it to grow and thrive.

You've measured the CO2 I put out?

1

EclecticKant t1_j03ahed wrote

Co2 is an infrared absorber, that's the problem.

And yes, people measured, the fact that co2 absorbs infrared makes it easy to measure its quantity. People measured how much the USA releases, then they divided it by the population to get an average.

1

fjccommish t1_j03as1x wrote

I asked what am I polluting.

CO2 is not a pollutant.

1

EclecticKant t1_j03eghx wrote

From Wikipedia

A pollutant or novel entity[1] is a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource.

Co2 has the unwanted and negative effect of absorbing infrared emissions of the earth surface, so it is a pollutant. I'm really curious as to why co2 is not a pollutant according to you, because plants use it?

1

fjccommish t1_j04eraf wrote

From scientists:

"A new study published recently by three veteran researchers reveals that "EPA's basic claim that CO2 is a pollutant is totally false.""

"The authors - Drs. Jim Wallace, John Christy and Joe D'Aleo - stated there is "very, very little doubt but that EPA's claim of a Tropical Hot Spot, caused by rising atmospheric CO2 levels, simply does not exist in the real world.""

1