• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 08:34
CEST 14:34
KST 21:34
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles4[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?14FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event22
StarCraft 2
General
Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event WardiTV Mondays Korean Starcraft League Week 77
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
i aint gon lie to u bruh... BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ ASL20 Preliminary Maps [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall SC uni coach streams logging into betting site
Tourneys
[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Summer Games Done Quick 2024!
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 604 users

China, US and the environment - Page 2

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 11 12 13 Next All
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-26 22:44:08
August 26 2019 22:43 GMT
#21
On August 27 2019 05:56 Broetchenholer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 27 2019 00:48 Aveng3r wrote:
On August 26 2019 03:38 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's super unfair of the "western" world to now tell china to stop polluting the environment. Sure, China is the biggest polluter with heavy industry and energy production, but we are buying the products the make for cheap so that we can have more efficient industries. The only way for change is going to be limiting our own consumerism by drastically increasing prizes for the worst offenders like meat, cars, electicity. Only if it hurts our bank accounts to eat meat every day, we will stop doing it. And then, when the western world drastically reduces consumerism, we can ask countries like China to do their part as well.

The problem is just that there is absolutely no political will for this discussion, as politicians don't want to suicide their career for necessary changes that can only be started by taking away the toys of the public. And the public will not start freely giving away their toys if they are not forced. And then there is the issue with social equality becoming worse if we just make the toys more expensive.

I would disagree with you to the extent that I think it is fair to pressure China to clean up their act, provided that we are holding up our end of the bargain as well.

I hear theres an upcoming presidential candidate who has some ideas

Also JimmiC good thread with a lot to talk about, but does the OP really need to be a snippet of your latest back and forth with GH?


Well, it can be expected that everybody does as much as is possible for their society and economy. But it's very unfair to go to the countries trying their best t ocatch up to our standard of living and just say that now that we fucked it up and had our 60 years of paradise, they are not allowed in. 1 billion chinese people want computers? Not gonna happen, they are not 100% emission free yet so they are not allowed to increase their energy consumption per capita. Of course it is reasonable to assume that if we are pulling our weight and help the less developed countries to do the same that they will try their best to reach a richer society in a less polluting way.
But that requires our effort. We need to invest massively in development projects all over the world to make the transition feasible for countries who can not prioritize climate policies over improving living conditions. And as we are not even able to say that we need to consume less in political discourse without being laughed out of the room, there is no reason to ever talk about any other countries then our own.


Agreed. Doesn't make any sense to me other than the reason mentioned by saocyn. China emits far less greenhouse gas per person than Western countries did at the same stage of economic development.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 26 2019 22:58 GMT
#22
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-26 23:46:26
August 26 2019 23:06 GMT
#23
On August 27 2019 07:58 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 27 2019 07:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 05:56 Broetchenholer wrote:
On August 27 2019 00:48 Aveng3r wrote:
On August 26 2019 03:38 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's super unfair of the "western" world to now tell china to stop polluting the environment. Sure, China is the biggest polluter with heavy industry and energy production, but we are buying the products the make for cheap so that we can have more efficient industries. The only way for change is going to be limiting our own consumerism by drastically increasing prizes for the worst offenders like meat, cars, electicity. Only if it hurts our bank accounts to eat meat every day, we will stop doing it. And then, when the western world drastically reduces consumerism, we can ask countries like China to do their part as well.

The problem is just that there is absolutely no political will for this discussion, as politicians don't want to suicide their career for necessary changes that can only be started by taking away the toys of the public. And the public will not start freely giving away their toys if they are not forced. And then there is the issue with social equality becoming worse if we just make the toys more expensive.

I would disagree with you to the extent that I think it is fair to pressure China to clean up their act, provided that we are holding up our end of the bargain as well.

I hear theres an upcoming presidential candidate who has some ideas

Also JimmiC good thread with a lot to talk about, but does the OP really need to be a snippet of your latest back and forth with GH?


Well, it can be expected that everybody does as much as is possible for their society and economy. But it's very unfair to go to the countries trying their best t ocatch up to our standard of living and just say that now that we fucked it up and had our 60 years of paradise, they are not allowed in. 1 billion chinese people want computers? Not gonna happen, they are not 100% emission free yet so they are not allowed to increase their energy consumption per capita. Of course it is reasonable to assume that if we are pulling our weight and help the less developed countries to do the same that they will try their best to reach a richer society in a less polluting way.
But that requires our effort. We need to invest massively in development projects all over the world to make the transition feasible for countries who can not prioritize climate policies over improving living conditions. And as we are not even able to say that we need to consume less in political discourse without being laughed out of the room, there is no reason to ever talk about any other countries then our own.


Agreed. Doesn't make any sense to me other than the reason mentioned by saocyn. China emits far less greenhouse gas per person than Western countries did at the same stage of economic development.


That just does not make sense. Of course they do technology is way different. And per capita is a terrible measure when comparing two countries of such different wealth unless your solution is just to make most people way poorer and just have a few super wealthy.

There is no racism involved, China is bad India is bad, the US is bad, Saudi Arabia is bad, Venezuala and Brazil are bad. China can get singled out because of its size and amount of people.

It is simply factual that they could do, and should do much better. And because of the amount of people they have they also have the ability to make one of the biggest impacts positively or negatively. With you theory that the US needs a socialist revolution to stop the climate crisis, you should also be calling on China to have a socialist revolution. Because they are worse.


You know a worse way to measure? Total without consideration for population or wealth, which is your preference.

Also, By 2020, every Chinese coal plant will be more efficient than every US coal plant so... US has far more wealth to allocate per person to reduce their carbon footprint and simply chooses not to.

China's wealth distribution is comparable or better than the US btw. I do support Chinese socialists though since you mentioned it. Capitalist influence has been growing in China and that's bad for everyone.

Vox covers why the US is the worse actor here:

To this day, it remains a central conservative argument against climate action: China is the real problem and it isn’t doing anything...

In support of this position, conservatives point to the fact that dozens of coal plants have either recently been built or are in the planning or construction phases in China. This, they say, gives the lie to the country’s promises.

It can be difficult for the average news consumer to sort out this dispute. The Chinese government is notoriously opaque, the situation is developing rapidly, and most of what reaches US media is shallow he-said, she-said coverage.

Happily, the Center for American Progress is on the case. It recently sent a team of researchers to China to investigate its energy markets, analyze regulatory and plant construction data, and interview Chinese coal miners and coal plant operators. It sought to answer a simple question: What is China doing about coal?

The result is a report — authored by Melanie Hart, Luke Bassett, and Blaine Johnson — that offers the clearest picture yet of the big picture on coal in China. And a closer look, it turns out, utterly destroys the conservative argument. Far from sitting back and coasting while the US acts, China is waging an aggressive, multi-front campaign to clean up coal before eventually phasing it out — reducing emissions from existing plants, mothballing older plants, and raising standards for new plants. Unlike the US, it is on track to exceed its Paris carbon reduction commitments.

China is acting far more intentionally and aggressively than the US — investing more, building more, testing and experimenting more. If the US remains on its current path, by 2030 China will be the uncontested technological and economic leader on climate change.

In short, while the US dithers along in a cosmically stupid dispute over whether science is real, China is tackling climate change with all guns blazing. The US, not China, is the laggard in this relationship.


www.vox.com
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 01:12:31
August 27 2019 01:09 GMT
#24
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 04:09:41
August 27 2019 01:39 GMT
#25
On August 27 2019 10:09 JimmiC wrote:
That is not my preference, my preference is to look at the entire picture which includes CO2 emissions, waste management practices, government policy, so on.

You keep making this like you think I'm saying China is bad and the US is good that is not the case. China is horrible and the US is not much better. But it is better because of the wealth.


It's not better though?

I would love it if China really becomes the technological and economic leader on climate change. That would be amazing. I have nothing against China doing well, I want everyone to do better.


They are on that path and the west isn't was the point?

I don't believe that China was truly socialist just a dictatorship marketing it as socialism. But for someone like you who does believe they are


No one thinks China is socialist? They are a mixed economy with aspects of central planning, public ownership (in the black unlike many western nations btw),local democratic governance, private ownership/capitalism etc... I get the impression you're not very familiar with China so when you ask:
can you answer me why you keep telling me how better the Chinese are doing and how many amazing gains they are getting, but that they are going more capitalist and that's bad.

If things are getting better than isn't capitalism working?

You do so because you are genuinely oblivious and not just being facetious. The simple answer is correlation isn't causation.

A more detailed answer would require a general understanding of the systems at play (of which I'm no expert) in China, but basically; as you and everyone is familiar with, the gridlock of US congress and arguing over whether climate change is even real is a result of the normalization of corruption through campaign finance and the revolving door of lobbyists and public office.

Without that capitalist gridlock like in the US congress, China can and has taken a vastly superior approach to climate change. First recognizing it's real, man made, and must be dealt with. Then making a deliberate and unparalleled effort to address it.

The US, is worse because despite knowing since at least the 70's they've been doing the opposite of what they needed and buying politicians to keep it that way.

EDIT: Koch's are a good example of the "well I'll die rich and before the shit hits anyway" crowd most responsible in the US for all that and it's extensively documented and no one is going to be held accountable because the corruption is just how US capitalism does business.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 13:25 GMT
#26
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
August 27 2019 13:31 GMT
#27
On August 27 2019 22:25 JimmiC wrote:
It is not capitalist gridlock. It democratic grid lock. I get it now, this whole time I thought it was Capitalism you were against but it is democratic systems you don't like.


You might be the first person, including Republicans to suggest that campaign finance isn't the source of why things like universal background checks can't get passed despite ~90% public support (this also contradicts when you yourself said that).

The rest is a random rant on China that's equally misguided.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 13:37:53
August 27 2019 13:34 GMT
#28
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 13:54 GMT
#29
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 14:08:24
August 27 2019 14:01 GMT
#30
"In an ideal world, this energy could be provided through 100% renewable energy: in such a world, CO2 emissions could be an avoidable consequence of development. However, currently we would expect that some of this energy access will have to come from fossil fuel consumption (although potentially with a higher mix of renewables than older industrial economies). Therefore, although the global challenge is to reduce emissions, some growth in per capita emissions from the world's poorest countries remains a sign of progress in terms of changing living conditions and poverty alleviation."


You realize the article/report I cited which is from CAP (a neoliberal, not left wing, operation) basically outlined how China is definitively outpacing the US historically and for the next decade culminating in them being an uncontested global leader on renewables?

It also mentioned how the US is using natural gas whereas China doesn't have that option. Although natural gas significantly increases methane emissions (worse than CO2) and fracking brings another load of issues.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 14:11:56
August 27 2019 14:10 GMT
#31
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 14:14 GMT
#32
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 14:21:06
August 27 2019 14:19 GMT
#33
On August 27 2019 23:14 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 27 2019 23:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
"In an ideal world, this energy could be provided through 100% renewable energy: in such a world, CO2 emissions could be an avoidable consequence of development. However, currently we would expect that some of this energy access will have to come from fossil fuel consumption (although potentially with a higher mix of renewables than older industrial economies). Therefore, although the global challenge is to reduce emissions, some growth in per capita emissions from the world's poorest countries remains a sign of progress in terms of changing living conditions and poverty alleviation."


You realize the article/report I cited which is from CAP (a neoliberal, not left wing, operation) basically outlined how China is definitively outpacing the US historically and for the next decade culminating in them being an uncontested global leader on renewables?

It also mentioned how the US is using natural gas whereas China doesn't have that option. Although natural gas significantly increases methane emissions (worse than CO2) and fracking brings another load of issues.



Are you saying that Natural gas is worse than coal?


It might be?

The drilling and extraction of natural gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, primary component of natural gas that is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years [3]. Preliminary studies and field measurements show that these so-called “fugitive” methane emissions range from 1 to 9 percent of total life cycle emissions [4].

Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors [5]. One recent study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer [6]. And if burning natural gas in vehicles is to deliver even marginal benefits, methane losses must be kept below 1 percent and 1.6 percent compared with diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively. Technologies are available to reduce much of the leaking methane, but deploying such technology would require new policies and investments [7].


www.ucsusa.org
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 14:43:44
August 27 2019 14:34 GMT
#34
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 14:54:54
August 27 2019 14:53 GMT
#35
On August 27 2019 23:34 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 27 2019 23:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:14 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
"In an ideal world, this energy could be provided through 100% renewable energy: in such a world, CO2 emissions could be an avoidable consequence of development. However, currently we would expect that some of this energy access will have to come from fossil fuel consumption (although potentially with a higher mix of renewables than older industrial economies). Therefore, although the global challenge is to reduce emissions, some growth in per capita emissions from the world's poorest countries remains a sign of progress in terms of changing living conditions and poverty alleviation."


You realize the article/report I cited which is from CAP (a neoliberal, not left wing, operation) basically outlined how China is definitively outpacing the US historically and for the next decade culminating in them being an uncontested global leader on renewables?

It also mentioned how the US is using natural gas whereas China doesn't have that option. Although natural gas significantly increases methane emissions (worse than CO2) and fracking brings another load of issues.



Are you saying that Natural gas is worse than coal?


It might be?

The drilling and extraction of natural gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, primary component of natural gas that is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years [3]. Preliminary studies and field measurements show that these so-called “fugitive” methane emissions range from 1 to 9 percent of total life cycle emissions [4].

Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors [5]. One recent study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer [6]. And if burning natural gas in vehicles is to deliver even marginal benefits, methane losses must be kept below 1 percent and 1.6 percent compared with diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively. Technologies are available to reduce much of the leaking methane, but deploying such technology would require new policies and investments [7].


www.ucsusa.org

It is not. Also from your site.

Show nested quote +
Natural gas is a fossil fuel, though the global warming emissions from its combustion are much lower than those from coal or oil.


https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/environmental-impacts-of-natural-gas

Show nested quote +

We need to be very clear here: Natural gas is not a clean form of energy. Cleaner than coal? Sure – but that’s not saying a heck of a lot. Clean like solar or wind? Get out of here!


https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/3-big-myths-about-natural-gas-and-our-climate

If some one is telling you that Natural gas is clean energy and as good as Solar or wind tell them to get out of town. If someone tells you that Coal is better than Natural gas, tell them to get out of town. Both statements are horribly inaccurate.


Look a lot of Semi's are transitioning from Diesel to Natural Gas this is a hella good thing. It will be way better when they switch from Natural gas to electricity. Sadly the amount of Batteries it requires and how we power them makes it not make sense yet.

Some people say Natural Gas is a bridge technology we should invest in until renewable's are better and priced better. I disagree it is better to invest in the future now and that will help bring the price down. BUT if some one said I am either going to buy a fleet of Diesel semi's or natural gas semi's, I'd say get the natural gas one.



oi, that literally says " from its combustion" which would be a fine measurement if it magically went from the ground to being used. Leakage often isn't calculated and when it is it's almost always underestimated.

Hopefully no one listens to you/your recommendations on diesel semis (or much else frankly).

Natural gas Semi's are a bad idea and bad investment because they are " conclusively detrimental"

Also, at a methane leakage rate of 2.3 percent, many other uses of natural gas besides generating electricity are conclusively detrimental for the climate. For example, EDF found that replacing the diesel used in most trucks or the gasoline consumed by most cars with natural gas would require a leakage rate of less than 1.4 percent before there would be any immediate climate benefit.

What’s more, some scientists believe that the leakage rate could be even higher than this new estimate.


www.pbs.org
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 15:13 GMT
#36
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 15:24:17
August 27 2019 15:22 GMT
#37
On August 28 2019 00:13 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 27 2019 23:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:34 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:14 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
"In an ideal world, this energy could be provided through 100% renewable energy: in such a world, CO2 emissions could be an avoidable consequence of development. However, currently we would expect that some of this energy access will have to come from fossil fuel consumption (although potentially with a higher mix of renewables than older industrial economies). Therefore, although the global challenge is to reduce emissions, some growth in per capita emissions from the world's poorest countries remains a sign of progress in terms of changing living conditions and poverty alleviation."


You realize the article/report I cited which is from CAP (a neoliberal, not left wing, operation) basically outlined how China is definitively outpacing the US historically and for the next decade culminating in them being an uncontested global leader on renewables?

It also mentioned how the US is using natural gas whereas China doesn't have that option. Although natural gas significantly increases methane emissions (worse than CO2) and fracking brings another load of issues.



Are you saying that Natural gas is worse than coal?


It might be?

The drilling and extraction of natural gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, primary component of natural gas that is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years [3]. Preliminary studies and field measurements show that these so-called “fugitive” methane emissions range from 1 to 9 percent of total life cycle emissions [4].

Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors [5]. One recent study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer [6]. And if burning natural gas in vehicles is to deliver even marginal benefits, methane losses must be kept below 1 percent and 1.6 percent compared with diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively. Technologies are available to reduce much of the leaking methane, but deploying such technology would require new policies and investments [7].


www.ucsusa.org

It is not. Also from your site.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel, though the global warming emissions from its combustion are much lower than those from coal or oil.


https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/environmental-impacts-of-natural-gas


We need to be very clear here: Natural gas is not a clean form of energy. Cleaner than coal? Sure – but that’s not saying a heck of a lot. Clean like solar or wind? Get out of here!


https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/3-big-myths-about-natural-gas-and-our-climate

If some one is telling you that Natural gas is clean energy and as good as Solar or wind tell them to get out of town. If someone tells you that Coal is better than Natural gas, tell them to get out of town. Both statements are horribly inaccurate.


Look a lot of Semi's are transitioning from Diesel to Natural Gas this is a hella good thing. It will be way better when they switch from Natural gas to electricity. Sadly the amount of Batteries it requires and how we power them makes it not make sense yet.

Some people say Natural Gas is a bridge technology we should invest in until renewable's are better and priced better. I disagree it is better to invest in the future now and that will help bring the price down. BUT if some one said I am either going to buy a fleet of Diesel semi's or natural gas semi's, I'd say get the natural gas one.



oi, that literally says " from its combustion" which would be a fine measurement if it magically went from the ground to being used. Leakage often isn't calculated and when it is it's almost always underestimated.

Hopefully no one listens to you/your recommendations on diesel semis (or much else frankly).

Natural gas Semi's are a bad idea and bad investment because they are " conclusively detrimental"

Also, at a methane leakage rate of 2.3 percent, many other uses of natural gas besides generating electricity are conclusively detrimental for the climate. For example, EDF found that replacing the diesel used in most trucks or the gasoline consumed by most cars with natural gas would require a leakage rate of less than 1.4 percent before there would be any immediate climate benefit.

What’s more, some scientists believe that the leakage rate could be even higher than this new estimate.


www.pbs.org



The study I posted is more recent than the one you just posted about.

No where in that article does it suggest that we should switch to coal. Because coal tech is basically as good as it can get and natural gas can get a lot cleaner.

We should be building all renewable energy at this point. But if you really think Coal is better than natural gas you are crazy. At the very worst Natural Gas is as bad because of leaks. But leaks can be found and can be fixed. Coal is just coal and is shitty and will always be shitty. Have you seen what the coal mines in Russia are like?


https://chinapower.csis.org/energy-footprint/

And yes I have read this, and I see how the government says they must look into more renewable energy, and before you start talking about their massive dam producing hydro, you might want to look into more whether that one is really good for the planet or the Chinese people.

It is not all bad, just more bad than good, I really didn't think I would get into a "coal is better than natural gas" argument with someone who has such big climate change fears he is willing to throw the entire world into war.



It's complicated like I suggested, but my point was China's use of coal (and significant improvement on it over US coal) is the only viable option they have to meet incredibly modest per capita requirements while modernizing/industrializing/urbanizing.

I don't think "coal is better than natural gas", which like most (all?) of the arguments you project onto me, I didn't say.

Considering how scrambled your argument has been and you're already doing the thing from the OP you took out again I think we're done.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 15:31 GMT
#38
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23172 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 15:39:18
August 27 2019 15:36 GMT
#39
On August 28 2019 00:31 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 28 2019 00:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 28 2019 00:13 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:34 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:14 JimmiC wrote:
On August 27 2019 23:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
"In an ideal world, this energy could be provided through 100% renewable energy: in such a world, CO2 emissions could be an avoidable consequence of development. However, currently we would expect that some of this energy access will have to come from fossil fuel consumption (although potentially with a higher mix of renewables than older industrial economies). Therefore, although the global challenge is to reduce emissions, some growth in per capita emissions from the world's poorest countries remains a sign of progress in terms of changing living conditions and poverty alleviation."


You realize the article/report I cited which is from CAP (a neoliberal, not left wing, operation) basically outlined how China is definitively outpacing the US historically and for the next decade culminating in them being an uncontested global leader on renewables?

It also mentioned how the US is using natural gas whereas China doesn't have that option. Although natural gas significantly increases methane emissions (worse than CO2) and fracking brings another load of issues.



Are you saying that Natural gas is worse than coal?


It might be?

The drilling and extraction of natural gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, primary component of natural gas that is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years [3]. Preliminary studies and field measurements show that these so-called “fugitive” methane emissions range from 1 to 9 percent of total life cycle emissions [4].

Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors [5]. One recent study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer [6]. And if burning natural gas in vehicles is to deliver even marginal benefits, methane losses must be kept below 1 percent and 1.6 percent compared with diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively. Technologies are available to reduce much of the leaking methane, but deploying such technology would require new policies and investments [7].


www.ucsusa.org

It is not. Also from your site.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel, though the global warming emissions from its combustion are much lower than those from coal or oil.


https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/environmental-impacts-of-natural-gas


We need to be very clear here: Natural gas is not a clean form of energy. Cleaner than coal? Sure – but that’s not saying a heck of a lot. Clean like solar or wind? Get out of here!


https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/3-big-myths-about-natural-gas-and-our-climate

If some one is telling you that Natural gas is clean energy and as good as Solar or wind tell them to get out of town. If someone tells you that Coal is better than Natural gas, tell them to get out of town. Both statements are horribly inaccurate.


Look a lot of Semi's are transitioning from Diesel to Natural Gas this is a hella good thing. It will be way better when they switch from Natural gas to electricity. Sadly the amount of Batteries it requires and how we power them makes it not make sense yet.

Some people say Natural Gas is a bridge technology we should invest in until renewable's are better and priced better. I disagree it is better to invest in the future now and that will help bring the price down. BUT if some one said I am either going to buy a fleet of Diesel semi's or natural gas semi's, I'd say get the natural gas one.



oi, that literally says " from its combustion" which would be a fine measurement if it magically went from the ground to being used. Leakage often isn't calculated and when it is it's almost always underestimated.

Hopefully no one listens to you/your recommendations on diesel semis (or much else frankly).

Natural gas Semi's are a bad idea and bad investment because they are " conclusively detrimental"

Also, at a methane leakage rate of 2.3 percent, many other uses of natural gas besides generating electricity are conclusively detrimental for the climate. For example, EDF found that replacing the diesel used in most trucks or the gasoline consumed by most cars with natural gas would require a leakage rate of less than 1.4 percent before there would be any immediate climate benefit.

What’s more, some scientists believe that the leakage rate could be even higher than this new estimate.


www.pbs.org



The study I posted is more recent than the one you just posted about.

No where in that article does it suggest that we should switch to coal. Because coal tech is basically as good as it can get and natural gas can get a lot cleaner.

We should be building all renewable energy at this point. But if you really think Coal is better than natural gas you are crazy. At the very worst Natural Gas is as bad because of leaks. But leaks can be found and can be fixed. Coal is just coal and is shitty and will always be shitty. Have you seen what the coal mines in Russia are like?


https://chinapower.csis.org/energy-footprint/

And yes I have read this, and I see how the government says they must look into more renewable energy, and before you start talking about their massive dam producing hydro, you might want to look into more whether that one is really good for the planet or the Chinese people.

It is not all bad, just more bad than good, I really didn't think I would get into a "coal is better than natural gas" argument with someone who has such big climate change fears he is willing to throw the entire world into war.



It's complicated like I suggested, but my point was China's use of coal (and significant improvement on it over US coal) is the only viable option they have to meet incredibly modest per capita requirements while modernizing/industrializing/urbanizing.

I don't think "coal is better than natural gas", which like most (all?) of the arguments you project onto me, I didn't say.

Considering how scrambled your argument has been and you're already doing the thing from the OP you took out again I think we're done.


I was asked to take it out, so I did. LOL no conspiracy.


jfc, no one said that, I was just noting it's not there. If I was implying anything, it's just that it was/is a lackluster OP

Glad you are not pro-coal, odd that you think NG is worse than coal, or don't think that, who knows.

Anyone who bothered to read my posts? Obviously not pro coal and think it's unclear and situational as to whether NG is better regarding climate change. It's better when it comes to other particulates though.

When you say China's coal is better then Americans coal are you including the entire lifecycle which means including taking where China is getting their coal from and where the Americans are?

I'm talking about how you're wrong that US coal is anywhere near the best it could be.

If you do you will find out again that the US and China are both awful and instead of defending China and attacking the US practices you should be attacking both practices. Apologizing for China does no good.

I'm only pointing out China isn't the worst despite your repeated assertion (though you seem to have backed off it at this point) it is.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 15:48 GMT
#40
--- Nuked ---
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 11 12 13 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Sparkling Tuna Cup
10:00
Weekly #96
ShoWTimE vs PercivalLIVE!
CranKy Ducklings326
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Harstem 308
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 22835
Calm 8693
Rain 6883
Bisu 3512
Jaedong 2881
Horang2 1631
Hyuk 1061
BeSt 965
GuemChi 648
Pusan 576
[ Show more ]
Larva 460
EffOrt 420
firebathero 380
Rush 279
Mini 277
ToSsGirL 187
PianO 172
Hyun 152
Snow 94
scan(afreeca) 63
Soulkey 62
Mind 58
Sea.KH 56
ajuk12(nOOB) 54
JulyZerg 42
Aegong 39
JYJ38
Sharp 32
Free 32
HiyA 24
Movie 23
Barracks 20
yabsab 18
soO 16
Sacsri 15
IntoTheRainbow 11
GoRush 11
Yoon 9
Bale 8
ivOry 5
Dota 2
Gorgc9114
qojqva1831
XcaliburYe366
League of Legends
singsing2013
Dendi1051
Counter-Strike
byalli249
x6flipin222
Other Games
tarik_tv22687
gofns20708
B2W.Neo1464
shahzam503
DeMusliM404
crisheroes380
hiko341
Liquid`RaSZi311
Lowko198
Mew2King78
Pyrionflax62
ArmadaUGS51
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick30047
StarCraft 2
angryscii 14
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 11 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV319
Upcoming Events
WardiTV European League
3h 26m
MaNa vs sebesdes
Mixu vs Fjant
ByuN vs HeRoMaRinE
ShoWTimE vs goblin
Gerald vs Babymarine
Krystianer vs YoungYakov
PiGosaur Monday
11h 26m
The PondCast
21h 26m
WardiTV European League
23h 26m
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
1d 3h
Replay Cast
1d 11h
RSL Revival
1d 21h
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
Replay Cast
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
Classic vs Cure
FEL
3 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
3 days
FEL
4 days
CSO Cup
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
FEL
5 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
5 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL Season 20
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.