As environmental quality continued to improve, in the 339 cities monitored at or above prefecture level, 72.6 percent met air quality standards, official data showed.
The kind of economic output matters, doesn’t it? If a country’s main sources of economic growth are tourism, cultural products, and financial instruments then it’s very different from a country that produces manufactured goods and relies on heavy industry.
It’s still useful because China is a country that produces manufactured goods and relies on heavy industry. The fact that they can achieve GDP growth from energy-intensive economic activity while shrinking the proportion of emissions is good news.
That’s the whole point, it actually isn’t. This isn’t helping. The planet is off worse. People in China earn more money and China exports more stuff, but in the end they still emit a buttload more because they, while also building lots of renewables, are also building lots and lots of new fossil fuel burning facilities.
Also, the people here keep bringing up this whole “China produces so many good and relies on heavy industry” point. That’s not what the gdp is about, so the argument is moot because it’s essentially just a feeling.
Last year, China brought 78 gigawatts of new coal power online. It should be 0, no question.
But by comparison they added 315 gigawatts of solar capacity and 119 gigawatts of wind.
This is part of the story of why emssions-to-GDP ratios have fallen, because even as more fossil fuel burning is happening it’s taking up less of the economy. This matters, because eventually that will reach a tipping point. They just haven’t reached it yet.
The kind of economic output matters, doesn’t it? If a country’s main sources of economic growth are tourism, cultural products, and financial instruments then it’s very different from a country that produces manufactured goods and relies on heavy industry.
Which means gdp is a shitty value to relate emissions to. Exactly. Because it says nothing about that.
It’s still useful because China is a country that produces manufactured goods and relies on heavy industry. The fact that they can achieve GDP growth from energy-intensive economic activity while shrinking the proportion of emissions is good news.
That’s the whole point, it actually isn’t. This isn’t helping. The planet is off worse. People in China earn more money and China exports more stuff, but in the end they still emit a buttload more because they, while also building lots of renewables, are also building lots and lots of new fossil fuel burning facilities.
Also, the people here keep bringing up this whole “China produces so many good and relies on heavy industry” point. That’s not what the gdp is about, so the argument is moot because it’s essentially just a feeling.
Last year, China brought 78 gigawatts of new coal power online. It should be 0, no question.
But by comparison they added 315 gigawatts of solar capacity and 119 gigawatts of wind.
This is part of the story of why emssions-to-GDP ratios have fallen, because even as more fossil fuel burning is happening it’s taking up less of the economy. This matters, because eventually that will reach a tipping point. They just haven’t reached it yet.