91 replies · 524 views · thread synced · 4 days ago
· View on torn.com
About this thread
Posts archived:92 / 92 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.
Archived posts
92
Discussion span
→
Authority score
11 / 100
Historical score
17 / 100
Story score
44 / 100
Engagement score
73 / 100
People posting, likes and official posts are not counted for this thread yet: on threads longer than one page they come from a periodic pass over the archive, which has not covered it.
Most-liked replies
Viracocha[1772040]
· 6 likes · I have partial solution...with China ordering more domestic coal production to meet the energy demands of manufacture, increasing the emissions in the number 1 polluting country, perhaps a drive to domestic manufacture in Western nations is needed to help China …
Sannemander[2088627]
· 6 likes · What a dumb response, per capita is by far the best way, and China has cold zones also, and untill now the US has put by far the most CO2 in the air, but I don't see it as a …
Styledcurve[2493033]
· 5 likes · Their ain't concerned about climate, their concerned about control. Between India, China, and so many other under developed nations, if pollution and climate change was the real issue , they'd start with the biggest offenders, not the smallest. But it's …
Their ain't concerned about climate, their concerned about control.
Between India, China, and so many other under developed nations, if pollution and climate change was the real issue , they'd start with the biggest offenders, not the smallest.
But it's ok, they all get back on their private jets and enjoy locally sourced caviar and only burn eco friendly redwood trees for the effigy sacrifices when they pray to their owl moon bear pig gods for relief from all this terrible smog plauging their view of their planet.
Humanity is a reactive species, not proactive. Countries will continue to do the bare minimum because they don't want any impacts on their economies and wealthy lifestyles. Once the situation becomes more severe, suddenly the whole world will have an "Oh shit!" moment and have to take more serious measures.
I have partial solution...with China ordering more domestic coal production to meet the energy demands of manufacture, increasing the emissions in the number 1 polluting country, perhaps a drive to domestic manufacture in Western nations is needed to help China get off of coal.
Why we could ban a range of products from China as part of our efforts to combat climate change.
Canada's emissions 2019: 73 Mega Tonnes per sq km. China's emissions for 2019: 5,418 Mega Tonnes per sq km.
China in 2019 produced 27% of the world's C02 emissions. The US 11%. The EU 6.6%
China produces more C02 then all other developed nations.
per capita is a ridiculous metric in this discussion. In Canada whether we have 38mil or 100mil, we have a base amount of energy needs for a country this large, and cold.
What a dumb response, per capita is by far the best way, and China has cold zones also, and untill now the US has put by far the most CO2 in the air, but I don't see it as a competition, we all should make much more effort.
Some of it will undoubtedly be dragged on longer then necessary for healthy profit margins. Then these same interests will convert to the new socially acceptable forms of energy production without too much critical analysis of what the scaling effect might induce. Already happening in some instances and there's been noticeable deleterious effects from the scaling up adoption of certain new techs.
It'll take some rather extreme generational disruption to spur concrete action.
I can agree with this, everyone should be working towards a cleaner source of energy. I do not however think we should cripple our ability to produce energy through fossil fuels before we get it figured out first.
We all hate each other. We seem to think that the other side of the isle is a threat to democracy and the future, the overwhelming majority think the world is headed in the wrong direction but unwilling to do anything to fix it or find middle ground. Especially if that change will inconvenience someone in the slightest way.
You yourself were just talking about the disgust you found in GOP supporters comments on another thread saying they need to chop it up with real folks. Perhaps you are in a giant echo chamber where you never hear anything but people agreeing, which is why you find it so outlandish.
How much of the current strife is related to that echo chamber though? I'd wager quite a bit of it is magnified disproportionately by it, but isn't the cause of any of it. We'll always be subject to isolate acts of idiocy, lack of awareness, profound sadness and hysteria, misplaced anger and frustration, etc. It gets manified by the echo chamber, but in isolation it doesn't really affect us.
Its the import of where those feelings are coming from where most of the strife lies in a profound abandonment of the simple, the small life. Too much ego, too much rat race and f**kery, too much wanton destruction and wreckless endangerement for entertainment, too many money addicts thinking the size of their wallet dictates the size of their voice, manhood or effect, too many substance abuse problems born out of a lack of peacefulness, etc. At the end of the day our ability to re-imagine our own destruction is outweighing our ability to settle and nurture what we have to begin with.
I could give zero f**ks about you, or most of these losers on here is more accurate.
Neither of which has ANY thing to do with future generations. This isn't about US.
You yourself were just talking about the disgust you found in GOP supporters comments on another thread saying they need to chop it up with real folks.
This is another thing I can't stand about you mfers: you make up shit.
So I'll clarify, using my words only:
"You mfers need to chop it up with someone different than you to get a different perspective."
Meaning ALL of you. I don't care what side of the political spectrum your asses sides with.
You understand Thief? If you don't want to, that's on you.
I've reached out to Luke, Zicky, Sek, & Limpd.
How hard is it for you to do the same.
If they don't wanna f**k with me...they don't have to. I'm GOOD either way.
Perhaps you are in a giant echo chamber where you never hear anything but people agreeing, which is why you find it so outlandish.
Seriously...don't write anything like that again. At this point, because most of us have been here so long, I'd think you were f**kin' with me. And I get tired of writing the same shit over and over.
Using a tons per square kilometer metric is so peculiar and makes no sense. Just because you have land doesn't mean it creates CO2 emissions; that's what people do. It's all about rates of emission and curbing those. Take for instance Canada which has a population of just over 36 million people and Mexico which has a population of over 123 million. Now Canada emits around 675 million tons of CO2 per year and whereas Mexico emits 441 million tons of CO2 per year. So in both absolute numbers and on a per capita basis, Canada emits more CO2. However when you look at it in a emissions per sq km, Canada drops to 88th in the world and Mexico drops to 60th. How is that an accurate depiction of CO2 emissions when Canada has 1/4th the population yet emits almost 50% more CO2 than Mexico?