6
submitted 7 months ago by barsoap@lemm.ee to c/videos@lemmy.world

There are lots of ways we are tackling the climate crisis, bringing down emissions and sucking carbon out of the atmosphere. But which method is the most cost-effective? For a given investment, which draws down the most carbon emissions? In this video I answer that question... and then talk about why that answer doesn't necessarily mean much.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Pressuring China is good, but not good enough to beat out biking. (They're also not either-or options, so there's no real excuse not to do the latter.)

[-] Fizz@lemmy.nz 1 points 7 months ago

If bike usage doubled in the west which is very unrealistic it still wouldn't reduce emissions as much as China reducing their emissions by 1%.

The sheer amount of co2 China is releasing is insane and its increasingly ever year. China alone releases 36% of the world's co2. If you can pressure them to follow what the west is doing you can make giant gains in co2 reduction. If you ignore China then all your efforts will be futile because they will continue to increase emissions.

this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
6 points (71.4% liked)

Videos

14318 readers
19 users here now

For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!

Rules

  1. Videos only
  2. Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
  3. Don't be a jerk
  4. No advertising
  5. No political videos, post those to !politicalvideos@lemmy.world instead.
  6. Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
  7. Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
  8. Duplicate posts may be removed

Note: bans may apply to both !videos@lemmy.world and !politicalvideos@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS