China Slashes SO2 Emissions Two-Thirds in 15 Years (ourworldindata.org)
- Reference: 0175822489
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/01/03/1319251/china-slashes-so2-emissions-two-thirds-in-15-years
- Source link: https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/china-has-reduced-sulphur-dioxide-emissions-by-more-than-two-thirds-in-the-last-15-years
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/china-has-reduced-sulphur-dioxide-emissions-by-more-than-two-thirds-in-the-last-15-years
Good , but thats an easy win (Score:3)
The technology is at least 40 years old, europe did it in the 80s and 90s and the USA are a similar time.
Now they need to try and reduce their CO2 emissions, not simply reduce the annual increase as per now. However I do realise that requires a change in mindset from the west too as we outsource a lot of our heavy industry there and buy endless consumer crap that china makes.
Re: (Score:3)
They are very close to leveling off, or perhaps already have,
[1]https://www.carbonbrief.org/an... [carbonbrief.org]
but then for all of us simply leveling off isn't close to enough.
It's like we've jumped out of an airplane, and now are now nearing terminal velocity. But we have yet to pop the parachute. Well get around to it any minute now...
[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-no-growth-for-chinas-emissions-in-q3-2024-despite-coal-power-rebound/
Re: (Score:2)
Good analogy.
Re: (Score:2)
De-globalization and an aging population will have the opposite effect. It's going to be harder and harder to fund government services as external investment and revenue dries up, and as the population ages out of their most productive working years. The government will be forced to cut costs in order to keep the older population going, and the easiest way to do that, if you're China, is to look at that big pile of coal your country is sitting on and burn it for very, very cheap fuel. In the USA we have
Re: (Score:2)
And if you are China pollution is taking bigger bites out of their environment and economy. So just burning more coal is a fools errand given the pollution problem with which they are currently dealing. In addition, pollution affects the youngins more than the oldins. So if you country is trying to increase the pop., then lay off the pollution.
Re: (Score:2)
We shouldn't believe those numbers. This is a watermelon. Greenwashing on the outside, Red China on the inside. China accounted for 95% of the world’s new coal power construction activity in 2023, according to the latest annual report from Global Energy Monitor (GEM). Source: [1]https://www.carbonbrief.org/ch... [carbonbrief.org] From March 2023: China is building six times more new coal plants than other countries, report finds Source: [2]https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02... [npr.org]
[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/
[2] https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02/1160441919/china-is-building-six-times-more-new-coal-plants-than-other-countries-report-fin
Re: (Score:1)
And yet an America produces more CO2 from oil than a Chinese person does coal.
Of course to people like you it's the Chinese person and the coal that's' the problem. Not the more polluting American with his oil.
Re: (Score:1)
We've been over this...fuck off with your "per capita" bullshit. You've got a few hundred million impoverished people, that are nothing to be proud of....but bring your "per capita" carbon statistics down. If you just account for the people that are in the areas where a bulk of the CO2 is being produced...it's a much different picture.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't there be other reasons than greenwashing to why the SO2 is dropping while they are building more coal plants? Maybe we can learn something here.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about China, but in the US, we use SO2 scrubbers - [1]https://www.duke-energy.com/ou... [duke-energy.com]
[1] https://www.duke-energy.com/our-company/environment/air-quality/sulfur-dioxide-scrubbers
Re: (Score:2)
> We shouldn't believe those numbers. This is a watermelon. Greenwashing on the outside, Red China on the inside. China accounted for 95% of the world’s new coal power construction activity in 2023, according to the latest annual report from Global Energy Monitor (GEM). Source: [1]https://www.carbonbrief.org/ch... [carbonbrief.org] From March 2023: China is building six times more new coal plants than other countries, report finds Source: [2]https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02... [npr.org]
You are talking about a different thing. You are giving links about increasing number of coal plants, while the article we are discussing is about reducing sulfur dioxide emissions.
[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/
[2] https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02/1160441919/china-is-building-six-times-more-new-coal-plants-than-other-countries-report-fin
Re: (Score:2)
And you don't think that maybe some of those coal plants are using the desulferization and exhaust stack filters, while replacing old coal plants that don't?
You seem to think that every plant they are building is net new, when some or many might be replacements for aging infrastructure that would be more expensive to refit than replace.
Re: (Score:3)
> "These are modeled estimates from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS)." What assumptions were included in this model?
> How much influence did the CCP have in the model and its assumptions?
[1]https://www.pnnl.gov/projects/... [pnnl.gov]
[1] https://www.pnnl.gov/projects/ceds
What about gunpowder (Score:2)
Gunpowder has 10% sulphur
I think China is the biggest manufacturer of fireworks.
Re: (Score:2)
Fireworks? Seriously?
If you want to worry about emissions from gunpowder, then maybe we should be taking a look at Russia and Israel, who are currently the biggest users of gunpowder by far with their warmongering and genocide.
That's actual good news! (Score:2)
good job!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
SO2 reductions are good for people who want healthy lungs but bad for global warming.
SO2 forms aerosols that reflect sunlight back into space and help cool the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Also good for people who don't want acid rain damaging lakes and rivers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the idea is to throw it up into the stratosphere mimicking a volcanic eruption, which we know cools the planet significantly.
Re: (Score:2)
> SO2 reductions are good for people who want healthy lungs but bad for global warming. SO2 forms aerosols that reflect sunlight back into space and help cool the planet.
Some.
But low-level SO2 emissions such as you get from coal power plants rain out of the atmosphere pretty quickly ("acid rain"). The people suggesting injecting sulfate aerosols into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight to reduce warming propose to put the aerosols in the stratosphere, where they don't quickly rain out.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, good job China! Next, CO2! Got to start somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
> Indeed, good job China! Next, CO2! Got to start somewhere.
Next? As well as their own solar, wind and nuclear sectors growing, China is a hug exporter of cheap solar panels and batteries.
Everyone in China is all too well aware of how bad air pollution can be.