Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Nothingtoseeheremmk t1_j5v4otv wrote

Reply to comment by bluemooncalhoun in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL

What? Most emissions from developing nations are coming from their own consumption now. Forcing companies to do something isn’t going to stop India from building coal plants

4

bluemooncalhoun t1_j5v7ffi wrote

Who do you think owns those coal plants, the people earning $2 a day working in them or the governments/companies running the factories that need most of that power? You forgetting that a significant proportion of those factories are working to produce goods for Western consumers and are contracted out by Western countries. Tomorrow the EU could release a statement saying "we won't allow anything you make to enter our countries unless you follow the same environmental regulations as we do" and these factories would happily charge 3x as much to do that. Asking the workers of a country to be responsible for the negative externalities of things they don't own being produced in factories owned by people that will happily milk them for profit is absurd.

−1

Nothingtoseeheremmk t1_j5v7tgf wrote

It doesn’t matter who owns them, they’re still going to emit a ton of carbon…

If the EU did what you’re suggesting it would massively drive up costs for those same workers too. That’s not to their benefit.

4

bluemooncalhoun t1_j5v9xnn wrote

First of all, 90% of those goods being produced aren't even staying in the local economy. The per capita consumption of the Western world dwarfs the higher population levels of the developing countries in which these goods are produced. This is why I'm arguing that the people in Western countries are responsible for the carbon, because it's their goods and business owners are deliberately producing goods elsewhere instead of locally because its profitable.

Second, let's say the EU really did force any goods to be produced according to their local standards. This would obviously include wage/worker standards in addition to environmental standards, so those factories would suddenly become the best places to work. This would provide pressure on other local factories to improve conditions so as to retain workers, thereby uplifting the local economy and helping everyone.

For the sake of consideration, let's say scenario 2 doesn't play out like that and locally produced goods become too expensive for people to afford. In that case, they can then turn to an even poorer country and start doing the same thing the EU did to them, thereby perpetuating the capitalist cycle.

0

Nothingtoseeheremmk t1_j5valf1 wrote

> First of all, 90% of those goods being produced aren’t even staying in the local economy

Do you have a source for this claim? That isn’t reflected in the research I’ve read

2