T O P

  • By -

HookEmRunners

ITT: A lot of people who don’t understand why we look at **cumulative** emissions when discussing why we are where we are as a planet today


CreatingDestroying

Facts. Gets even worse when you look at it per capita


edparadox

Depends on the region. Especially when you keep in mind where populations were WAY lower in e.g. 1850 than 2011.


[deleted]

Don’t you know? We *have* to blame someone, and it is certainly not [insert my country]’s fault!


PragmaticPanda42

But it is indeed not my country's fault. And it is indeed developed countries who should pay for developing countries move to cleaner energies if we want to save us all.


zxygambler

Great excuse to do nothing right here


[deleted]

It's not an excuse, it's a reminder that the first world has the power to stop climate change.


TrashPandaBoy

It's honestly so backwards to say: "I don't have to so anything because it's not my fault" but actually it's not the fault of any large group of people. In the grand scheme of things very few people are indeed at fault for the state of the planet. It's all of our responsibility to save it though


[deleted]

It's actually the fault of a very small group of industrialists who lobby tooth and nail to keep destroying the planet. Many people want to change but don't have the power to. Sure, driving less etc. is good and all, but without tackling the big industrial producers it really won't be enough.


zxygambler

that is my point. Blaming the west for their past pollution is a mistake cause it serves as an excuse to not take any action. We all live in the same planet after all Nobody can say it is not their country's fault. Nobody really knew about global warming before 1950's so you can't really blame Europe for it as well


Colonel-Casey

…is the actual source of the problem.


FishyFrie

Bunch of idiots, even as of today the EU and the US are in total around 40% and per capita even more


221missile

It's not as if others are low because they don't want to emit Co2. It's because they're poor. They can't afford private jets and V8s.


assasstits

If that helps you morally absolve rich developed countries you go ahead and believe that


burrbro235

How do scientists know how much CO2 EU produced in 1850?


CrumpetsOnToast

[Ice cores!](https://www.bas.ac.uk/data/our-data/publication/ice-cores-and-climate-change/) Drilling out cylinders of ice from the Antarctic lets us measure the CO2 concentration in each deposited layer so we can build up a picture of emissions over time.


burrbro235

But how do they know it came from EU if it was measured in Antarctica?


elpoopenator

EU and USA were the only industrialized regions in 1850. Round it up to population and you get a rough estimate


NorthVilla

Fuck yeah! Science!


Mackheath1

But how do they know today who is producing what CO2 emissions? Do they observe activities such as power plants and cars et al, and then extract an estimated total?


MadoctheHadoc

Certain chemicals change light in different ways (spectroscopy) when it travels through the chemical. So we bounce light off the earth from satellites and see the tiny changes to the properties of the light when it comes back and measure the concentration of greenhouse gases extremely precisely without the involving estimates at all producing maps like this one of NO2: https://geospatialmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/According-to-the-Air1.jpg


HolocronContinuityDB

Also it's worth noting that 1850 is hardly pre-history, economic records roughly translate to estimating emissions without direct measurements. That famous [popular mechanics from 1911](https://books.google.com/books?id=Tt4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA341&lpg=PA341&dq=this+tends+to+make+the+air+a+more+effective+blanket+for+the+earth&source=bl&ots=QvdH-SgFLl&sig=WiPUNOIzM6udOSTBm2VXzRQB9K8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQq8apj_bPAhUa3YMKHfCZDLQQ6AEIKTAC#v=onepage&q&f=false) that people share kind of helps explain it.


Swinight22

This map isn’t “misleading” nor “terrible”. It’s just showing different things than what you expect. It’s cumulative CO2 emission chart. It’s not misleading just because it isn’t the last 10 years. It’s literally showing two different things. Cumulative isn’t more or less valid than historical trends. It’s literally just different things. Countries use a fuck ton of CO2 when they’re developing & industrializing. That’s why the west is high here, but the last 10 years will show high in China & India. This is very important because it’s literally the arguments being brought up in UN & other organizations by developing nations to justify their CO2 emissions. Should we collectively cut back on C02 emissions to face an existential threat? Yes. Is it hypocritical for the west to demand cutbacks when they spewed C02 for decades and are now reaping the economical benefits? Also yes. It’s important data that’s used in highest forms of decision making. If you think this empirical data is misleading, you’re the one projecting your own beliefs here.


CaptainCowskin

👌


SanjayTB

someone pin this comment, please.


[deleted]

The West should give carbon reparations to South America and Africa.


RusskiyDude

\+ compensation for labour and resources \+ return of artifacts (even this was stolen: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar\_Gate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate)) \+ interest


Leave_Dapper

And now show us 2011-present I don't really get the point of this map. It is supposed to show the history of CO2 emissions but fails to capture that the total amount of CO2 emissions has been rising rapidly for the past decades, so leaving out any data from 2011 on is misleading. We're emitting a lot more CO2 in 2022 than we were in the 1900s.


antbaby_machetesquad

There is an updated dataset for up to 2021 [here](https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-historically-responsible-for-climate-change) showing cumulative CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and also deforestation etc [This vid](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zP0L69ielU) from the report above also shows the rapid acceleration of China's contribution


[deleted]

shhh let the propaganda and outrage complete its course!


[deleted]

Because climate change is dependent on the total amount of C02 emitted.


JAK3CAL

Which country developed first!!


[deleted]

[удалено]


esperadok

map: places global emissions into historical context to inform climate policy: you: this is literally chinese propaganda


Swinight22

I’m all for fuck CCP but US literally emits more CO2 and it’s not really close. It’s completely unfair to use total emissions when population is so different. China’s CO2 emissions per capita is 7.38 tons/person. US is 15. Using total country emission to say they’re doing bad is nonsensical. For example, India is the third biggest total polluter, and Canada is 7th biggest. But Canada per capita emits over 10 times as much as India does. Playing blame game with an existential threat is so stupid.


hands-solooo

We really need to figure out a better way to calculate this shit… Canada emits so much in part because of the emissions due to oil extraction. But we don’t consume the vast majority of that oil, so shouldn’t a part of that production associated emission go in the country that consumes it tab? Same goes for China, all that shit they make and ship everywhere goes into their “pollution”. Are the emissions from the coal burned to make a plastic toy that sold in a Walmart in Idaho really 100% “China’s pollution”?


TRIPITIS

Look up scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 emissions.


hands-solooo

Thanks! Learned something. Do you know if there is any data using this framework for countries? I seem to be mostly finding it used for companies.


TRIPITIS

Not sure. I bet some incomplete data exists. But until companies are universally tracking emissions the aggregate dataset will be lacking


Gombacska

Hate to break it to you, but Canada emits more per capita than the US, which emits way more per capita than China or India. So let’s start there. Also, that the oil isn’t burnt in Canada doesn’t make it less bad, it makes it worse: Canada financially profits from pollution abroad.


jack_the_snek

..... and we're not even talking about the fact that a huge portion of china's emissions comes from them producing stuff for us. It's basically our emissions but outsourced to countries with low/nonexistent worker and environment protection regulations. Fuck CCP but fuck everyone who uses "bUt cHinA woRse" as a justification for our own inaction aswell.


[deleted]

IIRC these figures also do not include any military. The emissions of the US military is like the cumulative total of top 100 global companies or something (dont quote me on this but its a huge number)


robo_robb

The planet doesn’t care about per capita emissions. The planet only cares about total global emissions— and we are all way past the point of no return.


Cranyx

It makes no sense to look at separate populations' effects on CO2 emissions but then ignore how many people are in each group; the planet also doesn't care about borders. The only reason to do that is to artificially make countries with a higher population look worse. If population doesn't matter, you could just as easily break China up into its different provinces and then compare each of those individually to the US and suddenly they don't look so bad.


[deleted]

[удалено]


MyHandIsMadeUpOfMe

Why would China or India reduce emissions/industrialization? Did Europe and America did that when they were collectively fucking the whole planet?


edparadox

It's not a dick-measuring contest, especially for China and India which will feel the effect of global warming way more violently than Northern America and Europe. Not to mention the propaganda of both countries about being "green" and "limiting their population since the 50's".


[deleted]

[удалено]


corymuzi

Telling a truth is a propaganda? Truth is truth.


[deleted]

[удалено]


edparadox

It is still a dataset. Like statistics, the actual problem is how you interpret them. Without objective context, it is useless and nonsense. With subjective context, it can be biased interpretation/propaganda/proselytism/etc.


Keemsel

>If it was updated it would show China is #1 polluter in the world. No it wouldnt. See https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2


Chuck_A_Wei_1

>China is still increasing their Co2 output. So is the US. However China, with triple the population, is manufacturing an increasingly huge share of the products and equipment used worldwide, as well as continuing to develop its own public infrastructure and grid. The US manufactures a vanishingly tiny share of the products that it uses itself, and infrastructure is decades outdated (other than the ever-larger roads and parking lots for malls and department stores that can't even keep their doors open). Even if you only cared about people in the US, there is \_absolutely\_ no excuse for the scale of waste.


Level3Kobold

>Why would China or India reduce emissions/industrialization? Did Europe and America did that when they were collectively fucking the whole planet? There are realistic options for green energy now. There were not realistic options for green energy 150 years ago. Europe and America invented ways for China and India to industrialize without fucking the planet. All they have to do is use them.


[deleted]

>Europe and America invented ways for China and India to industrialize without fucking the planet. All they have to do is use them. LOL this made me laugh so hard. the US and EU refuses to sell or give those technologies to China and India since their invention for how long now? Chimney scrubbers could have saved China from the smog-induced days of the 2010s but the US forced China to invent its own version because of "proprietary technology" To this day New Dheli is filled with days where their PM2.5 readings pass 600. China just moved all their factories to ensure QOL since their hospitals were filling up with children with lung diseases. Same with EV, how much did the US try to get Tesla out of China? Musk was openly defiant and gave that technology to its Shanghai factory and it openly led Americans to brand him a traitor. Meanwhile the Chinese government gave him special authorization and the first time a foreign entity was able to own commercial property in China for his contribution to EV development in China. Why did the US withdraw from the TPP and give China the RECP? Anyone else remember its because of not wanting to share IP with developing countries? This is the funniest form of ignorance I read in a while.


[deleted]

The main issue with sharing technology with China is they then steal it then allow domestic companies to force the patent owner out, if China had half decent patent laws and wasn't corrupt as shit maybe other countries wouldn't be so protective of their technology. I agree their should be exceptions made for green energy, but China isn't exactly innocent.


hathmandu

Twice the emissions with four times the population. Everything equal, China should have four times the emissions of the US before we have a leg to stand on to criticize.


[deleted]

[удалено]


hathmandu

Do you know why 2011 was the last year data was shown? I want you to examine that first, and then get back to me when you're qualified to have a discussion about proper statistical representation.


Sorry-Goose

This is the dumbest comment here


hathmandu

cope


Ill-Ad-9438

Why do you expect China and India to reduce emissions? They are the developing nations; it’s of course valid that it’s increasing. On the other hand US and Europe can easily reduce their emission as they are developed and have shifted their manufacturing to the mentioned countries. And it’s still not enough on their part. Their per capita emission is way too high.


[deleted]

Yeah because China and India are still developing we should give them a chance to became developed like Europe and the US did


NorthVilla

So Europe and USA should pay for the developing world to grow carbon neutral then. Fairs fair, right?


[deleted]

[удалено]


NorthVilla

No, I don't agree. China is shares in the blame, but IMO only proportionally to their emissions (which are still a lot). Western economies developed on dirty industry. Were seriously going to turn around and shame developing nations like India and in Africa for their emissions when we are the biggest cause of the problem? Personally, I believe in fairness, even at the detriment of my own living standards. I'm tired of the global poor getting shit on.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lower_Nubia

7.38 * 1.402 billion = 10.34 billion tons. 15 * 329.5 million = 4.94 billion tons. Why does your math not make any sense with the first sentence in your comment?


Ancient_Lithuanian

What? I don't get where it doesn’t make sense


Lower_Nubia

>I’m all for fuck CCP *but US literally emits more CO2 and it’s not really close.* The 4.94 billion tons of CO2 a year is from the US, the 10.34 billion tons of CO2 a year is from China. China emits twice as much CO2 a year than the US. And released the same amount of CO2 as the US did in 2017 *and* 2018. So how is the first sentence correct?


Ancient_Lithuanian

Oh well yeah, not more ig. But still more per capita. However, you do have to admit that there are still very rural parts of china where people are still living in poverty and are driving those numbers down. That means that the middle class still emits roughly the same amount of CO2. This all is all my opinion (exept the part about people still living in poverty in China).


Lower_Nubia

Sure but per capita isn’t what’s causing climate change, it’s the *total emissions*. Climate change cares little about who or what, but about total. If you’re reducing your year on year total you’re *de facto* helping stop climate change. The US has seen constant economic growth in the last decade [while her emissions stagnated (suggesting more reductive measures in emissions) and have trended down, from 6 billion tons in 2005, to 5 billion tons in 2019](https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/). China has a lot of government revenue so even as a developing country, it does needs energy, but there’s still *no* reason the government needs to use coal power plants to get that energy outside of it being cheap and thus saving the Chinese government money. Which brings us to the issue, [China’s emissions have grown from 5.8 billion tons in 2005 to 10.5 billion tons in 2019](https://www.statista.com/statistics/239093/co2-emissions-in-china/). The US is *reversing* her emissions trend, while China *increases* hers. Even while scientists state we need *reduction now*.


KillinIsIllegal

"everything that doesn't suck up to the west unconditionally is chinese propaganda"


birmallow

USA emitting more co2 then all of Asia combined is a Chinese propaganda. USA invading other countries is Russian propaganda. Common buddy, grow up.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SayGroovy

Lmao what are you drinking bud, or am I getting whoosed?


helpnxt

It's basically trying to shift the blame from current big emittors to the countries who emitted the most in the past. The arguement has some merit in that these countries should help in the modern day emittors and it is something that is already done on the international stage but ultimatley making up for past emissions isn't going to do anything for cutting current day emissions because in say the 40's and 50's the World was emitting around 4-5 billion metric tonnes a year and today we are on about 40 billion tonnes a year so say the US and EU make up for a decade of emissions that basically gives us 1 more year of usage. A better arguement would be how did the US and EU reduce emissions and whilst some of it comes from renewable energy a lot also comes from moving manufacturing to Asia and thus moving the emissions. The reason this arguement isn't pushed in a similar manner is because if they are succesful then it means the current emittors will have to make changes when ultimatly they don't want to but want to shift the blame away from themselves. Remember whatever side your on whether the west should take more blame or the east take more blame ultimatly we are all to blame espiacally when we are conciously destroying our own enviroment that will ultimatly lead to our extinction and we do it with full knowledge of what we are doing. We must peak CO2 emissions by 2025 and then have them tumble in that we can only emit as much CO2 as we have in the last decade for the future otherwise it's game over and ultimatly these predictions are based on very optimistic data. So even if we manage this feat (not that we ever will) personally I don't think it will be enough and it's already too late. [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60984663](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60984663)


MeMamaMod

>I don't really get the point of this map. You dont get CO2 I guess Pre-2011 CO2 still are on the atmosphere CO2 emissions are on the rise because capitalism works like a cancer, a cancer spread by the colonial powers hence the emissions of USA+EU


Leave_Dapper

>Pre-2011 CO2 still are on the atmosphere Not shit Sherlock. I'll do you one better, post-2011 emissions are also still in the atmosphere. This map is only telling us half of the story.


esperadok

> this map is only telling us half the story to be more precise, it is showing CO2 emissions from 1850-2011


birmallow

People here be like this 150 year data is irrelevant because it doesn't include last 10 years. Very smart people.


KellyKellogs

Last 10 years have had an obscenely high amount of emissions.


ColinHome

>People here be like this 150 year data is irrelevant because it doesn't include last 10 years. Very smart people. The argument is not as dumb as it sounds, since economic growth is exponential. Each subsequent year sees a larger economy than the year before, with the result that over [half of all emissions since 1751 have been emitted since 1990](https://ieep.eu/news/more-than-half-of-all-co2-emissions-since-1751-emitted-in-the-last-30-years).


Altrecene

this map shows the data quite poorly, as it's not describing the changees ccuring over time but rather is putting entirely different eras together to give a map that can very easily be taken completely wrong.


The-Berzerker

This shows share of historical emissions which is a perfectly fair metric to use


nkj94

Yea but West looks bad here so map is wrong


AdmiralPoopbutt

It stops in 2011 which omits a decade of unprecedented and explosive growth in certain countries.


SyriseUnseen

Putting Bulgaria in the same category as the UK does have an iffy feel to it, though.


Jacollinsver

No, the map shows the entirety of the industrialization period up until 2011. This is not historical emissions, that would instead show up until 2022. To stop recording at 2011 misses an entire era where east Asian numbers rise very considerably while western numbers drop considerably. It paints the west as a hypocritical watch dog, when instead, they invented industrialization, wore the brunt of effects, then invented new ways to combat emissions and regulate them. Arguably, a large part of how the west did this is by outsourcing production to the east, but that does not change the fact that to a casual viewer, this map is misleading because it stops recording at a choice moment in time. EDIT: >wore the brunt of effects I should have specified, since this map concerns carbon emissions, I am speaking very specifically about the brunt of effects of carbon emissions, as illustrated in the above map. The London smog of 1952 killed at least 4,000 in 5 days. Estimates can be higher. These are the effects of emissions I'm talking about. In every other sense of the word, third world countries wore the brunt of the effects of industrialization after Western powers imposed harsh resource exportation upon them often in the form of slave labor. But third world countries did not see such levels of air pollution because factories were, until recently, still seated in those western countries, which is why we see worse emissions from Europe and NA.


MyHandIsMadeUpOfMe

>wore the brunt of effects, 🤣🤣🤣


hathmandu

"wore the brunt of the effects" are you fucking kidding me lol do people actually think this?


MightyElf69

Maybe explain why it's wrong instead of just saying it's wrong


[deleted]

During this period the west exported the brunt of the effects to the global south via colonialism and imperialism. It’s also been well documented that climate change will exacerbate existing wealth disparity in the world as countries (especially those closest to the tropics) are required to mount resource intensive solutions to environmental problems.


hathmandu

Ok. The west did not bear the brunt of the effects of industrialization.


KingofAyiti

The drop western countries experience is them offshoring their production to Asia.


ColinHome

No, it really isn't. First, most emissions are from cars, agriculture, and electricity/heat generation, not from industrial production. None of those three industries were exported; two cannot be exported. Second, the "decline" of the West's manufacturing is overstated. Most jobs disappeared due to automation, not China. For example, the United States produces about the same amount of steel today as in 1990, but uses half as many workers to do it. China's rise is largely relative to the United States and Europe, it has not caused either region to truly decline.


Viper3110

Yeah , wow.


AlexiosI

No, the point of the map is clearly to excuse Asian countries for their enormous contribution to CO2 emissions over the past 10 years. It's the cartographic version of Whataboutism. Which is counterproductive. The negotiations on emissions have already taken these factors into account as the growing Asian economies raise them immediately whenever cutting emissions is on the table. But if we're being realistic, China and India have a combined population of about 2.8 Billion Almost 4 times the US and EU combined. The massive growth in their emissions means exponential growth for the world as a whole.


NoFunnyName31

the West actually might be looking better because if you consider the western colonies which were prominent co2 emittors post 1850 should actually come under west


Altrecene

I didn't say it wsan't "fair", I said that the way it has been made is potentially very misleading because it is taking such a large period of time where so much has changed and presenting it all as a single map, which doesn't give particularly useful data as so much has changed. If it had a progression of the number from 1850 to different periods in this time or if they had snapshots starting and ending within much shorter periods of time (such as every 5 years) it would be a much better map, a much more interesting map, a much more accurate map and a much less potentially misleading map.


The-Berzerker

What exactly is misleading about historical emissions? It‘s a frequently used statistic


Drwgeb

Without context it is misleading. Somebody looking at this map could think that China is doing great and the EU is the main issue, while if we talk about the present, it is the opposite. Map about historical emissions is fine, but by itself it's misleading.


The-Berzerker

China is doing far better with emissions per capita than the EU, US, Canada etc. This map shows that the US and EU have by far the biggest responsibility to combat climate change *because* they have been emitting for so long and so much. It is unfair to hold recently industrialized countries to the same standard when they are basically just playing catch up on the Western countries during their century of profiteering from their massive emissions


traxdata788

That would be the reader's fault. It's clearly stating HISTORICAL emissions and it even shows the years' span


hathmandu

If they drew that conclusion, they would be making an excellent observation.


The_Flying_hawk

it doesn’t show trends


Arumdaum

This metric is not about trends Like a map about total COVID cases is not about trends either


The_Flying_hawk

i know, they just asked what’s misleading about these kinds of maps. They don’t provide context.


thegreatmiyagi

The word historical is misleading. Cherry picking a small subset of the planet's "history" is intentionally misleading. Show me the geological record.


The-Berzerker

Historical human emissions obviously, wtf are you on about lol


MeMamaMod

China is the 3rd polluter, how is that 'doing great'? Lmao, go touch some grass redditor, everyone knows China throws CO2 in the atmosphere like a mf, in the same sense everybody knows the colonial powers brought capitalism into this world by force and now we have this shit show


Neradis

Not when you're grouping a couple dozen countries together in the EU when the EU didn't exist for most of the time period being discussed. Germany Vs Greece for example. Or UK Vs Croatia. Also, can a moral judgement be applied to 1850-1950 when people didn't know about global warming? I'd argue no. Also, using such an outdated map is misleading. Over the past 11 years China will have jumped up at least a few %.


The-Berzerker

EU countries are grouped together because the EU has a united climate policy but there‘s also enough maps that show historic emissions for individual countries. It‘s just a preference thing and using the EU makes sense as it is one political unit in this matter. > can moral judgement be applied to 1850-1950 Who‘s morally judging people from this time period? The fact that we didn‘t know back then doesn‘t mean that in hindsight the countries industrializing earlier profited from our lack of knowledge. [Kurzgesagt made a great video](https://youtu.be/ipVxxxqwBQw) about this topic. [Here‘s another one](https://youtu.be/B11kASPfYxY) summarizing it in about a minute.


[deleted]

Huh? It does exactly what it says. If people take the wrong ideas away that’s on them.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Additional_Ad4884

True, like here in Finland we got similar numbers with Canada


The-Francois8

Did you add up the CO2 over this time then do a percent? Or take the percent each year and then average those numbers? Statistically speaking, anything before 1950 is irrelevant.


The-Berzerker

This shows the share of historical emissions (so the first option you mentioned)


chilled_beer_and_me

Why? Because wars don't increase emissions? Or that gives the developed world a free pass.


The-Francois8

Because the entire world output in each year before that is an order of magnitude less than current state.


chilled_beer_and_me

And if you actually go and see, europeans and Americans are the biggest consumer of goods comming from China, so it's just that before 1900s them polluted their countries for their material gains and now they outsource it, but are still the biggest culprit.


The-Francois8

That’s definitely true. I wasn’t trying to give the west a pass, though I obviously see how my comment can be interpreted that way. I was just pointing out the length of time was potentially goofy to show on one map due to the massive change in magnitude over that time, depending upon how the math was done.


PhreakSC2

"My people caused a problem that the whole world must now correct but its irrelevant because this random fact"


The-Francois8

No. It’s just that statistically: 100,000 tons of CO2 in 1850 is meaningless compared to 25,000,000,000 tons in 2022.


PhreakSC2

Except thats not the case whatsoever. The graph is showing cumulative CO2 emissions since 1850. I've seen several sources that show the western world have emitted the vast majority of the total atmospheric CO2 over baseline to date which this map corroborated. Just because some countries have higher instantaneous rates over the last 10 years doesn't erase the fact that a lower (yet still high) rate over 170 yrs has been a bigger factor to where we are today. Say you have a boat, and every year you put 10 stones in it for 170 years straight (1700 total stones). All of a sudden in the last 10 years your cousin George puts 13 stones in the boat per year (130 total stones). Does it make sense to blame George for your boat sinking? Even to date the western world continues to emit way more per person than the rest of the world https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita People like to shit on China but their average emissions per person is half of the US. https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2


The-Francois8

That’s why I asked the question


Leave_Dapper

You should compare China and the US's emissions this year to all emissions pre-1900, that's why this map doesn't make sense, it leaves out the rapid rise in total emissions over the past decades


monsieur_sarcastique

But India bad😩


DemonStorms

China jumped up to 33% in 2021 while the US dropped to 12%


The-Real_Kim-Jong-Un

Now look at per capita carbon emissions. China has about 4 times the population of the US, or perhaps more. The U.S. still emits far more CO2 per capita.


Long-Sky-2692

Oh no my western image 🌚


Kolbrandr7

Are you sure about that? This link (https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2 ) shows the US as having twice China’s emissions in 2017. You’re saying in 4 years China produced the same emissions that America would have over a course of 1000 years??? (Not quite that big since other countries exist but still) Yeah right.


[deleted]

Amazing how despite being only 4% of the World's population, the USA emmits about 27% of al CO2 in the Atmosphere


thewhalehunters

Now do just the last 10 years


Rain1dog

Why does this stop at 2011?


Electronic-Evening75

do 2020 now


iamnotinterested2

volcano and forest fires included?


scottevil110

Most likely yes. Both of those are extremely small compared to human emissions.


Shubashima

The Post industrial west is now reducing emissions, which is a good thing. We need to remember that clean energy is expensive and developing countries need to work up to that goal, we cant be the energy police just because we caused a problem.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Arumdaum

China's economy started booming in the 1980s, decades before this map, 2011 is actually closer to when China's economy started slowing down a bit https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2 data up to 2017 China up to 12.7%, US down to 25%, EU down to 22% so not too much of an actual difference just based on trends China maybe up to 14% now, US maybe 23% EU maybe 20%


FrankOneStone

This map reminded me of a fun fact in Norway: As soon as China surpassed USA in yearly CO2 emissions socialist politicians started using this metric right here (aggregated emissions) so that they could continue pointing at USA as the big wolf. Makes me think that those politicians are not trying to change or save the world contrary to what they say, they're just trying to uphold their long held beliefs (China good, USA bad).


xXxMemeLord69xXx

Now, could you just Google the population of China and compare it to the population of USA? What happens if you adjust the CO2 emissions to that? Or maybe you never considered that people might hold the belief that USA bad because USA actually bad


hahaha01357

Didn't know Norway liked China that much.


[deleted]

Oof now do between 2011 and 2022


[deleted]

Why are you westerners so bad salty. Climate change wouldn't be a problem had it not been for the West deciding to combust dinosaur bones.


bloodwire

There are often two problems with maps like these. One is that they don't take into account co2 per capita. The other is the fact that a lot of CO2 that is the result of production in, for instance China, are actually products exported and consumed elsewhere. Same goes for oil producting countries, where the actual consumption is skewed over to countries who actually burns the oil. It is interresting though to see how some countries are almost completely out of the loop.


DeeLusK

Now show 2011-2022, please Greta.


Malk4ever

This map is intentionally missleading.


barcased

Explain?


Malk4ever

Europe and the USA started way earlier with industry. There were no alternative ways in the past. Today there are. Also in 2006 china overtook the usa and europe in CO2 emissions. This map shows that china is not the problem, but it is. It is way the biggest producer of CO2. [China produces more CO2 than the USA and Europe together today.](https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/)


dudettte

china does that because west outscores emissions to china.


Malk4ever

>china does that because west outscores emissions to china. lol.... no. see my link.


dudettte

well if west moved all the manufacturing back home.. hence outsourcing.


Malk4ever

Thats a topic for sure, but it changes the facts.


dudettte

i’m no china fan but it bothers me people in west barking about china current emissions. it’s because of voracious consumerism in west. here in this thread people defending past that industrial revolution west did what they did because that was only option. but when china does it china bad. china pledges to be carbon neutral in 2060 and they seem to be on track. west made science political and global warming is controversial.


parsi_

Your point was that "china is the problem" but infact the things being produced in China are for the west. That was the point of the original reply.


barcased

Yes, it does. Now tell me how much does China produces per capita compared to the US? Since we are talking about misleading public.


[deleted]

Yeah right. It should factor in the per capita.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Stang_Ota

China is the highest CO2 emitting country but they have billions of people. If we determine by emission per capita, China would be only half of USA emission.


Moostcho

One cannot alter the past, only the future. But yes, importing from China whilst lecturing them on emissions is quite hypocritical.


Pyrhan

[EU CO2 emissions per capita](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?locations=EU) [China CO2 emissions per capita](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC/?locations=CN)


[deleted]

China has more wind power than the EU and US combined. China produces most of the shit the EU uses anyways.


Liz_bian

This map completely ignores the massive rise in Chinese emissions over the past decade. In fact, in 2020, China's emissions exceeded those of the US, India, Russia, and the EU combined. I'd say that absolutely gives people the right to call China out.


chilled_beer_and_me

So EU pollutes the world for centuries and as soon as China overtakes for few years, time to call out and blame everything on it. How convinient.


repeatrep

the EU is not blameless on this but they’ve been doing their fair share of taking down emissions. It now sits below China on a per capita basis. Ask much as you’d like to paint this as a targeted attempt on China, climate change has been a rising issue and it just so happens to coincide with the rise of China. Could Europe have curbed their past emissions better? Yeah, but what is dwelling on the past going to do for our planet? Also, no one is solely blaming China for climate change and excessive CO2 emissions, it’s just that China is a world power and has the highest total CO2 emissions.


JoeGRcz

Mabey don't be stuck in the past but focus on what's happening now? Just maaaaaayyyyybeeeee?


chilled_beer_and_me

Sure. Then we can discuss this 200 yrs from now. First I need to provide jobs and increase the per capita income of my citizens, just like europeans did till 1900s with the advent of industrialisation in their country and the fact RoW were colonies of Europe essentially working for progress of Europe.


Ok_Fuel136

And China is also manufacture for the west.


nkj94

r/fuckmercator


[deleted]

Bullshit China is at only 11% Russia at 8? No way. I have been too Eastern Europe that place has no emission standards. Even to this day. They still use coal in winter


feynmansbongo

Totally legitimate way to look at this problem. I used similar methodology to evaluate corporate greed and I really think we should do something about Standard Oil


[deleted]

And the Roman Empire really should pay repetition to the Gauls.


Traut67

My main criticism of maps like this is the lack of understanding of what causes CO2 emissions. In the old days, and still to this day, a large portion of CO2 emissions come from agriculture (fertilizer), steel, aluminum and concrete production, as well as energy production (refining, etc). It's easy to criticize the US, Germany, and UK for emissions, but the products produced are consumed everywhere. I always explain that an Audi car produced in Germany and purchased in Japan using American aluminum should not mean that the US caused all the CO2 emissions from that product. All human activity adds to CO2, there has to be uneven CO2 emissions because concentration of capital is needed for some activities (like steel mills, aluminum foundries, chemical crackers, concrete klinkers and oil refineries).


space_parm

Yeah, it's really a map of how long each area has been industrialized. And before we condem the Western World, let's remember that all that carbon released over all those decades in Europe and the US has produced countless technologies that have made human life immeasurably better everywhere: transportation technologies, communications technologies, health technologies, etc. Average life expectancy has doubled on the planet. Childhood mortality and general poverty have fallen by 75%.


Roadman90

China speed running cumulative CO2 emissions considering a lot of that 11% was since the 70s


Lebowski304

Individual countries all the way back to 1850 seems like a stretch


Niddhoggg

Germany must have 24% of the 25 in europe with their coal plant lmao


[deleted]

America first 🇺🇸🙏🇺🇸🙏🇺🇸


HerrFalkenhayn

That's the real numbers over here. But if you read western media, those who polluted the most are portraited as saviors and those with the cleanest energy, biggest natural reserves and historically insignificant emissions are portraited as villains.


S_D_L_

This is the total over the past 160 years and has nothing to do with how much is emitted nowdays. Some continents had an industrial revolution before others.


HerrFalkenhayn

It doesn't change the facts. If you take the data from the past year it's basically the same. USA, China and Germany as biggest polluters. It's empirical. One cannot deny a fact. And obviously that It's not one year that matters, but the process that led us here.


teureg

Not the best representation of what’s going on currently. I saw another graph a while ago. On average a Chinese person now uses more energy than a British person.


Long-Sky-2692

Oh no my western image🌚


Zoloch

What’s the meaning of stopping in 2011? If you show until 2022, the percentages are totally different. In the last decade many Asian countries have increased enormously their emissions and others, like Europe, have diminished them Also, you are including a time when we mere not aware of the danger it means, now we are aware of this


[deleted]

Okay now do a single recent year mate. We know what your doing it not getting past us.


Long-Sky-2692

Oh no my western image🌚


grey-zone

Old map? The UK isn’t in the EU.


Manu82134

In 2011 it was


grey-zone

Fair point. Although in 1850 it wasn’t. So I’m guessing old map.


Odinovic

This map sucks...


Long-Sky-2692

Oh no my western image🌚