Leaders were selected to speak if they had proposals for updating the pre-2030 climate plan for their country; had updated targets for transitioning to net-zero energy emissions that committed to no new gas, oil or coal; had plans for the phasing out of fossil fuels; and had new climate adaptation or funding pledges.
So China wasn't invited to speak because they're on target and haven't changed their goals. Great title
Are they uninviting those that just pulled back their commitments as the UK has done?
Both sides!!
Your daily reminder that despite producing most of the world's goods, China isn't even near the top generator of CO2 per capita, sitting at around half that of the US.
Meanwhile, China is building not one, two or three, but twenty one. Yes 21! New nuclear reactors.
It's starting to feel like old Lemmy again with these trash headlines being torn apart
China literally produces almost 30% of annual CO2 emissions. Maybe you are using the CCPs data, in which they lied for years that they were beating expectations in reduction, when the reality was they had increased emissions.
You don't understand what per capita means do you?
They produce around 30% of the global manufacturing output, so that's basically one to one. Yet they represent 15% of the world population, meaning half of their production is for the benefit of others.
How many nuclear plants is the US building right now already?
I do, and I know that as they continue to emit more that per Capita argument means less and less. They are emitting more each year, and I have no doubt they will cut corners with their reactors. Why? Because they cut corners everywhere else while lieing to your face. That's what made their Fukushima complaints so hilarious.
The US doesn't build enough of them. Wish they would and I continue to argue for more. Lemmy alone is filled with anti-nuke imbeciles thinking they can achieve the same results with solar.
Ah, because using Western data that claims natural gas emissions are dominated by burning rather than methane leakage are...SO much more reliable.
In what reality does China even get close to making a quarter of the world's products let alone "most"?
Edit: the source below talks about pre-COVID numbers and manufacturing has absolutely moved out of China since then.
If you want to be specific, they make 28.7% (2019) of the world's manufacturing output. So yes, more than a quarter.
Thanks for supporting your comments with sources.
producing most of the world’s goods
China makes the most goods, but most goods are not made by China. They are the top producer, but produce less than 50% of all goods.
That has changed since COVID. They are under a quarter as manufacturing has been moved away from China.
[citation needed]
Didn't China's manufacturing output increase by 25% in dollar terms since 2019?
Would dollar terms be relevant metric since the costs went up post COVID? It's total goods manufactured and that dipped.
Stupidest thing I've heard all day and it's the first thing I've read today. First you have the world's #1 consumer and the guys who literally run the world with their military and economic empire; the guys who sent all the manufacturing to China in the first place. And then you've got the world's biggest economy, the place where all the shit is actually made, and the country that's already doing the most in the world to switch to clean energy.
This summit without those two examples is nothing but a joke.
Both China and the USA combined are over half of all GHG emissions. They need to be pressured to act more aggressively
I think US and China are both trying to convert to green energy even though the US has a bunch of oil and coal lobbying.
Crap crap title
News from around the world!
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc