this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024

124 points (100.0% liked)

Earth

12850 readers

1 users here now

The world’s #1 planet!

A community for the discussion of the environment, climate change, ecology, sustainability, nature, and pictures of cute wild animals.

Socialism is the only path out of the global ecological crisis.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

124

Wake up babe, Bloomberg confirms China is the only country seriously trying to save the world yet again (hexbear.net)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

2024 BNEF Investment Trends report just dropped: https://about.bnef.com/blog/global-clean-energy-investment-jumps-17-hits-1-8-trillion-in-2023-according-to-bloombergnef-report/

EU absolutely fucking BODIED lmao

The US did double its investment since last year (141B), China was previously at 546B.

Canada not even mentioned. Embarrassing.

top 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 60 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Why aren't we asking why China wants a habitable planet?

[–] [email protected] 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Life under capitalism is so miserable you wish for the world to end. So burgers actually want to speed up climate change in their death drive.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

Accelerationism, but for the heat death of the universe.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago

So they can rule the world with an iron fist!!!!!!! Duh!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

I'm sure we'll get there but the talking points haven't updated past just insisting that actually China is still the biggest polluter in the world, also what does per capita mean.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I don't consider western/capitalist investments to equal the same as a chinese investment; America regularly just gives private corporations billions of dollars and they do nothing with it.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I was about to say, how much of that money was thrown at companies like Hyperloop and Tesla

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

hyperloop

presumably not enough, since hyperloop is dead lol.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

It's all just thrown into the stock market.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Just happened to be reading about afforestation today; particularly the Great Green Walls of China and Africa.
Curiously, the wiki article on the Chinese one has a dedicated 'criticism' section, while the African one does not

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

surprised natopedia doesn't slander the Afrifan one too.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Yes, tho The Great Satan per capita investment is bigger than China's

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago

True but US investment is less efficient per dollar than China's and US is also more power hungry per capita rhan China

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

They also have a larger GDP per capita

Correct way to normalize this data is how many dollars invested per GDP

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

American economy continues to be incredibly inefficient

[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago

china is reaching levels of basedness long thought impossible

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But at what cost

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago

676 billion

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Assuming these are already all in US dollars.

United States:

3.031 x 10^11 dollars / 3.36 x 10^8 people = $902.1/person

China:

6.759 x 10^11 dollars / 1.45 x 10^9 people = $466.1/person

Adjusted for a PPP of 3.62, this is the equivalent of $1685.79/person.

In other words, the US almost doubles China’s per-capita spending, but if you adjust for PPP it’s the other way around. And of course China’s raw spending is about double the US’s.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I've never fully understood the full impact of what PPP really means - Does this mean China are committing more 'productivity' or 'resource' to renewables per capita? Or does it just mean that they're committing more relative to their GDP/quality of life?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

China purposely devalues the CNY against the USD. I believe that they do this because it's beneficial for international trade. China's investment in these areas is in CNY and therefore, just converting it to its value in USD doesn't give a true comparison of the value of investment. PPP takes a collection of various commodities in both countries and compares their domestic prices with each other. This gives us the PPP adjusted value of investments in USD. Hopefully I got that right.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

I believe that they do this because it's beneficial for international trade.

Having a weak currency facilitates other countries buying your products, so it's useful for an export economy - but it prevents you from importing as easily. The opposite is true for having a strong currency, and this dynamic drives a lot of things like de-industrialization in strong currency countries and unequal exchange extracting wealth from weak currency ones.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

Whenever they have climate spending bar charts - there needs to be an extra bar for each country also showing military spending.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

This graph just shows how the three (china, us, eu) are pretty much equal, adjusted for population. If anything, it looks like EU and US are ahead. Without more context, it doesn't prove anything, other than China being the larger economy.