- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/56844329
You must log in or # to comment.
Meanwhile China is performing the exact pivot to renewables that needs to happen. When an authoritarian state is more positive for the future of humanity, Europe needs to quit the excuses and answer seriously. Saving the soul of democracy requires seriously muzzling capital and its capacity for destruction.
The least thing the Chinese party-state has in mind is democracy.
The article falls short of a lot of explanations, the most important likely being democracy. It doesn’t even touch the issue even though China is a serial human rights abuser. It’s almost hilarious to interpret this as China ‘saving the soul of democracy.’ This, of course, doesn’t make any sense.
It also says that CO2 emissions in China have been stagnating for over a year and a half. Although this is true, it is very likely because of a downturn in Chinese production. We will see what happens if and when the economic environment improves and output increases. Most economists are very sceptical and think China’s stagnating CO2 emissions is temporal rather than structural. China is -as the article also admits- the world’s largest polluter. No country is on track to meet the Paris goals, but the EU and its members states are better than China. And during the COP30 last year, just 83 countries joined a global movement committing themselves to phase out fossil fuels. Among these are European countries, many from South America, the Caribbean. China is not among them, the globe’s biggest polluter openly refuses to phase out fossil fuels.
The authoritarian state is the worst thing for the future of the world and the humanity. This is blatant propaganda.
Hear that “whoosh” sound? It’s the sound of my point going over your head.
If only all the billions spent on AI would have been spent on tackling climate protection, we would have clean energy and a ton of new jobs.
Whereas AI is doing the opposite, destroying the planet and taking jobs.
At this point we don’t even need to spend billions subsidizing green energy; it’s already cheaper than fossil fuels on the free market. We’re now subsidizing bad shit out of sheer hate and suicidal contrarianism for contrarianism’s sake.
(And blatant corruption and graft. That’s a big reason for the otherwise literally clinically insane fossil fuel subsidies, too.)
I’d say corruption and grift is the actual why, “sheer hate and suicidal contrarianism for contrarianism’s sake” is somehow how it’s successfully sold to the masses.
Yeah but AI is aiming at removing workers… So more money for them !
Well worth destroying the world !
You can’t recharge a tank on a battle field. Fossil fuels must exist until the conflict between the multipolar world and the rule based world is settled. Bonus points for drying up Iran and opening the northern shipping routes. Also overall, a warmer earth should create more rain.
Problem with any fossil powered equipment in 2026 is that it is very easy to detect with cheap IR cameras, which makes it a target for drones, missiles or artillery.
That’s a very interesting idea. There is still a need to transport energy to the war zone. Solar cells are not an option in Ukraine.
There is also right now a shortage of lithium and all the old tanks will not be refurbished.
Not with that attitude you can’t
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density_Extended_Reference_Table
It’s not attitude but availability. Right now gasoline is the best option.
Wish we could… But we can’t reject the argument because we don’t control the story. The guys getting insanely rich from fossil fuels and buying media (and politicians) do. And the majority of people blindly believes everything if they just hear it often enough.
