- 616 Posts
- 153 Comments
2·4 hours agoClimate Action Tracker for China
- Policies and action: insufficient
- NDC (nationally determined contributions) target against modelled domestic pathways: highly insufficient
- NDC target against against fair share: insufficient
- Overall rating: highly insufficient
[Edit for clarity.]
You continue to engage in whataboutism. What a waste of time.
The renewable energy is one thing. China is the largest emitter of carbon dioxide, and emissions are still rising.
It’s blatant whataboutism as this report is on China, and it says the country’s climate emission policy is insufficient. Just read the report.
This is the -unfortunately expected- whataboutism.
Additional renewable energy capacities do not compensate the harm done to the climate by carbon dioxide emissions, and China’s emissioin are still rising while it is already the world’s largest emitter as the report also says.
21·13 hours agoJoin? No. Global trade requires fair competition, reciprocity, transparent supply chains, human rights baked into economic agreements such as the WTO, among other things.
What humanity needs is a just transition to solve current and upcoming social and environmental issues. There are many countries in the world whose policies are manifestly unjust, unfortunately.
Chinese companies should only be allowed to found companies in the EU as a joint venture with a European partner, while this European partner holds a controlling majority. I am sure that China will fully support such a law as a reciprocity is an important feature of global trade.
Thanks to @Varyk@sh.itjust.works
Here is another article on this issue: China’s Massive Detention of Foreigners
81·3 days agoLet us not forget the people in Xinjiang who pay a harsh price for cheap Chinese EV cars. Unfortunately, forced labour and supply chain transparency wasn’t an issue here.
What does Switzerland say about China’s support of Russia in its war in Ukraine?
Addition:
The report by the Swiss Bankers Association (SBA) and consultants zeb said on Thursday that Swiss policymakers should develop an approach to sanctions that ensures neutral Switzerland remains a safe haven for banks and their customers […]
Shortly after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Switzerland decided to adopt EU sanctions against Moscow. One measure was to freeze assets belonging to sanctioned Russians.
August Benz, deputy head of the SBA, raised concerns about Switzerland’s rapid adoption of sanctions […]
According to bankers, Switzerland’s clear stance on the Ukraine war has raised fears among foreign customers that it could support further Western sanctions in the future.
I wouldn’t say they ‘redesigned’ it. As the Wikipedia article reads, among others:
However, after Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, religious conflicts re-emerged, and the Shadian problem as an example shows an unreconciled discord between the CCP and Islamic religious groups in China.
In 2022, the government began renovations to remove the Arabic-style architecture from the Grand Mosque of Shadian and replace it with Chinese-style pagoda architecture. The renovations were completed in 2024.
As the linked article suggests, things are getting worse. This ‘redesign’ is pure propaganda.
[Edit typo.]
Yes, just to provide some detailed numbers regarding the UK from an article I posted recently in a similar community (article from May 2024):
A vast subsea nuclear graveyard planned to hold Britain’s burgeoning piles of radioactive waste is set to become the biggest, longest-lasting and most expensive infrastructure project ever undertaken in the UK. The project [UK’s nuclear waste dump] is now predicted to take more than 150yrs to complete with lifetime costs of £66bn in today’s money…The waste itself includes 110,000 tonnes of uranium, 6,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuels & about 120 tonnes of plutonium. – Source
Burying Radioactive Nuclear Waste Poses Enormous Risks – (Archived link)
Although it may not produce the emissions that burning fossil fuels does, nuclear power presents many other problems. Mining, processing and transporting uranium to fuel reactors creates toxic pollution and destroys ecosystems, and reactors increase risks of nuclear weapons proliferation and radioactive contamination. Disposing of the highly radioactive waste is also challenging. […]
Even without an accident, trucking the wastes will emit low levels of radiation, which industry claims will produce “acceptable” exposure. Transferring it from the facility to truck and then to repository also poses major risks. […]
The spent fuel will remain radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years, and contamination and leaks are possible during storage, containment, transportation and burial. Industry, with its usual “out of sight, out of mind” approach, has no valid way to monitor the radioactive materials once they’re buried. […]
Nuclear power is enormously expensive and projects always exceed budgets. It also takes a long time to build and put a reactor into operation. Disposing of the radioactive wastes creates numerous risks. Energy from wind, solar and geothermal with energy storage costs far less, with prices dropping every day, and comes with far fewer risks.
Addition: I posted that recently in a similar context:
IAEA-database of nuclear and radiological incidents
Note that although the list which is linked above gives an impression of the spread, diversity and frequency of incidents and accidents with nuclear power plants and radioactive transports, it is not a complete list of all nuclear incidents and accidents; different national regulators have different regimes as to which incidents to report to the IAEA and which not.
That’s by far enough here.
Additional interesting stats, especially regarding statement on the safety of nuclear energy and waste:
IAEA-database of nuclear and radiological incidents
Note that although the list which is linked above gives an impression of the spread, diversity and frequency of incidents and accidents with nuclear power plants radioactive transports, it is not a complete list of all nuclear incidents and accidents; different national regulators have different regimes as to which incidents to report to the IAEA and which not.
One article on nuclear energy in the UK from May 2024 says:
A vast subsea nuclear graveyard planned to hold Britain’s burgeoning piles of radioactive waste is set to become the biggest, longest-lasting and most expensive infrastructure project ever undertaken in the UK. The project [UK’s nuclear waste dump] is now predicted to take more than 150yrs to complete with lifetime costs of £66bn in today’s money…The waste itself includes 110,000 tonnes of uranium, 6,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuels & about 120 tonnes of plutonium. – Source
[Edit typo.]
A related article with interesting stats on the world’s nuclear power plants: the U.S. and France have the largest fleet, but China Is rapidly building new nuclear power plants as the rest of the world stalls
“There are probably not more than seven countries that have the capability to design, manufacture and operate nuclear power plants,” Cui Jianchun, the Chinese foreign ministry’s envoy in nearby Hong Kong, said during an official visit to the plant. “We used to be a follower, but now China is a leader.”
Here are some charts on Germany’s energy mix and long-term development (April 2024), it supports @superkret@feddit.org’s statement:
Yeah, not just redirecting funds, they can also use forced labour to lower their production costs.
They have already done that, just read their Project 2025.
These comments have nothing to do with economics.
@5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
What should Hungarians do to prevent a further drift into dictatorship? Sitting at home and watching propaganda TV?