https://undecidedmf.com/chinas-mass...s impressive, but it's,other 40% will be wind. China has these big deserts that it is using……
Lols I love the patterning in the arrays of solar panels https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20180822-why-china-is-transforming-the-worlds-solar-energy
Anybody with an actual technical background knows that's baloney. Tesla’s benefitting from $9 billion in regulatory subsidies aimed at destroying their competition that has a superior technology. Of course people are buying artificially cheapened EVs. Well, sort of. And when China offers cheaper copies of the same thing, Tesla will die. It's inevitable. https://www.businessinsider.com/china-xi-jinping-crush-tesla-elon-musk-american-ev-industry-2024-2
So why can't your side come up with even one good argument against AGW theory? Your whole schtick here, after all, is tossing out a hundred bad arguments, in the vain hope something will stick. Relying on that tactic makes you all look like purveyors of pseudoscience.
And the predictions their theories make end up being wrong, so nobody takes their theories seriously. The predictions made by AGW theory come true, so that theory is assigned credibility. That's how science works. You don't get credibility by complaining about how unfair it is that failed theories don't get credibility, or declaring that the whole world is conspiring against you.
Except AGW has failed miserably. Temps are rising a few tenths of a degree Celsius per decade. The climate alarmists predictions have proven wrong since the "Great Ice return" predicted in the 1970's. Weather and therefore climate in the long run continues to be, as IPCC said in2001, in their third AR: "
And yet they continue to build and operate more coal fired plants than any other nation by a huge margin.
The models predicted +0.20 C / decade, observed warming was +0.19C / decade. Like I said, the models have been very accurate. Of course, the success of the models is just icing on the cake. The directly observed evidence proves AGW theory quite nicely, no models required. That was your side predicting that, not ours. It's one of your most spectactular faceplants. And it's ongoing -- your side has been predicting "New Ice Age Real Soon Now!" constantly for over 40 years running now, and is still doing it. There's an entire thread of it here. Your side can't even get the direction of the change right.
In 2021, China was the top energy producer and consumer in the world, primary energy production grew by more than 6%, and energy production across sources grew. The fastest-growing energy sources year-over-year were nuclear (11%), renewables (9%), and natural gas (8%). Energy consumption grew by almost 6%; natural gas (12%), nuclear (11%), and renewables (8%) grew the most. In 2022, non-fossil fuels accounted for 49% of total installed electricity generation capacity, most of which came from hydroelectric (16%), solar (15%), and wind (14%). https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/CHN Today, the USA depends on fossil fuel for 60% of our electricity production. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3 As a result, the USA emits significantly more greenhouse gasses per capita than does China. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/ China is the world leader in wind and solar in terms of patents, manufacturing, installation and is the source of the engineering that brings the US panels made in SE Asia. The USA produces 1.9% of the panels we use. Besides the uselessness of complaining about some other country, it's all the more ridiculous when WE don't measure up.
There are two. You have steadfastly refused to take up either. The Sun-Climate Effect Indirect Support for the Svensmark Hypothesis
Which means 51% is fossil fuel generated, right? Problem is they have a whole lot more "per capitas" the us. AndThe climate doesn't run on a "per capita" basis - bulk quantity driven pollution. Seems like if complaining about some other country is useless, so, then would be bragging on them.
This article is inaccurate when it comes to Tesla - a major car company building and selling cars in China as well as building and selling cars in the USA and other places. It Tesla is a major player in China. So, more care is required when talking about stuff like battery supply. In the US, Tesla buys batteries from Panasonic. And, they are building a battery factory in a deal that allows use of CATL technology - the leading battery technology company in China. In China, Tesla buys batteries from China. So, the BYD comment on batteries was pointless. Unlike legacy auto in America, Tesla is highly vertically oriented. That is, it buys very little from other companies. Today, it buys batteries. But, that is about the end of it. In fact, they build the tools they need. They have lithium mining, and battery manufacturing in process. That is monumentally NOT like legacy auto in the US, where little "Ford" emblems block shipments due to supply chain problems. On the other hand, China absolutely IS a threat. They have multiple manufacturers who make a broad range of very good EVs. They (and Tesla) are MILES ahead of our legacy auto companies. Battery advancements are exceeding 500 mile per charge while reducing charge time and dropping in price by substantial amounts. Our new EV startups (Rivian, etc.) are making very good vehicles, but they are a long way from turning a profit - which means they have uncertain life.
Yes - in 2022. China has moved beyond the 50% point since then. Plus, remember that coal is only one of the fossil fuels in question. Yes, they have a higher population. But, that doesn't mean that each person has to live with less energy simply because they live in a populous country. Per capita measurements have to be the comparison. It's worth pointing to China when the questions relate to clean energy technology, policy that may work or not work, and concerns about there work to gain influence through helping other countries meet their carbon commitments, and of course their automotive business that they intend to spread across the world. China is clamping down on vehicle emissions in a serious way - enough that many vehicles can not be sold in China. Plus, they are advantaging EVs. It will be interesting to watch how their policy affects their city air pollution and oil consumption - another greenhouse gas issue.
From the paper: Reasons for this denialism are multifaceted: Political affiliation and ideology, income, education, and exposure to extreme weather events are all important factors4,5,6. Denialism is more prevalent where local economies are highly dependent on fossil fuels7, in rural communities, and in populations where mistrust in science is pronounced8,9. Social media reaches millions of users, providing a key mechanism for influencers to spread misinformation10. The ability of social media to influence and harden attitudes was apparent in the response to COVID-19 vaccines11. Please note that nowhere is scientific disagreement mentioned. That is an attack on those who dissent from orthodoxy.
Ah yes, your threads about how the current record high global temperatures prove that you're right about how massive cooling is coming RealSoonNow. Those didn't age well. As the years go by and the temperatures keep climbing, you'll still be telling us the cooling will be here RealSoonNow. We predicted years ago you'd be doing that now, and we've been proven correct.
