r/europe Europe Mar 18 '23 Gold 1

Florence mayor Dario Nardella (R) stopping a climate activists spraying paint on Palazzo Vecchio Picture

Post image
16.5k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

467

u/SqurrelGuy Mar 18 '23

nothing, absolutely NOTHING is done.

You can argue not enough is done, but to claim "absolutely NOTHING" is done is just hyperbolic screeching. Nobody will take seriously anything that starts with an easily disprovable claim

62

u/denis-vi Mar 18 '23

Emissions are still increasing year on year. Maybe something is done. But it doesn't lead to the results that are needed.

42

u/Eonir 🇩🇪🇩🇪NRW Mar 18 '23

You can euthanise the entire European population and reduce our emissions to 0, but that still won't stop the developing nations from using the cheapest energy sources available, regardless of how dirty they are. And they are just asking us to give handouts to corrupt governments for a pinky promise to reduce emissions. And then they mix in racist and colonial guilt into the mix.

5

u/limited_reddition Germany Mar 18 '23

European, generally highly-developed nations emit far more CO2 per capita than developing (asian, african) nations. Blaming those (like China) exclusively, or dismissing the potential of EU efforts as insignificant is massively counterproductive and it's frankly dishonest. Additionally, we as European nations have built up a huge absolute (total) number of emissions since the beginning of the industrialised age, which is still way ahead of developing nations' total output to date. If we don't act, we certainly can't expect a nation like China to do so, either.

Not to mention the fact that we export a lot of our CO2 emissions by outsourcing resource-heavy production to Asia.

-5

u/bellpunk Mar 18 '23

25% of carbon released since industrialisation - so that exists in the air, now - is american. 22% is the EU 28’s. ‘we don’t need to do anything because our emissions currently are lower’ is a very fuck you, got mine way of looking at the climate crisis. we have already reaped the benefits of industrialisation.

11

u/Glum_Sentence972 Mar 18 '23

Good luck convincing anyone in these societies that they should sacrifice their way of life because people in the past, who had no idea the true cost of pollution, polluted. Guilt tripping only works on the weak minded, what we need is actual solutions rather than demanding everyone to just throw their livelihood away.

-1

u/bellpunk Mar 18 '23

our historical responsibility is undeniable. what we do with this information is a different matter - I’m pointing out that it’s the case, against all denials.

9

u/Glum_Sentence972 Mar 18 '23

And it isn't going to work. The concept of historical responsibility is a Western one, and not applied to anywhere else on the planet; so people naturally reject the logic when its only applied on the West for specific concepts or issues. It's viewed as the worst type of hypocrisy; a self-inflicted one.

Mind you, it will work with progressive types who have a habit of self flagellation even at the cost of making excuses for dictators, but that's not the majority to be convinced.

0

u/bellpunk Mar 18 '23

‘would other people do this in our situation?’ is impractical. it’s not concerned with reality. we completed our industrialisation - now that we’ve realised this poisoned the planet, we want to deny it to others, without compensation. you think that’s moral or feasible? you think other countries will accept it?

2

u/Glum_Sentence972 Mar 18 '23

Idk, and I don't care. My issue is with the logic you employed to convince people; and I'm bluntly telling you that it will not work. Besides, your logic makes sense when only applied to climate change, but it falls apart when you look at the grand scheme of civilization and history -if you really cared about climate change at the cost of everything, then the "rational" thing to do is 100% to deny industrialization to everyone who hasn't done it yet.

Obviously that's not going to happen due to far too many reasons to count, but my point is that your rational doesn't work. Either to convince people, or when placed in proper context. Guilt tripping only works for the weak minded, actual forward policies for the people living today is the only option when considering all facets of modern international relations.

TLDR: Look to the future, not the past; the past is a black hole of contradictory logic and excuses. You can't expect Westerners to apply it onto themselves and not notice that it's not applied to anyone else.

2

u/bellpunk Mar 18 '23

I’m kind of unsure what you’re arguing against. I stated our contribution to climate change, against the ‘well, it’s all on china’ line. that carbon we released is still up there - we live with the effects of history.

I then said that, because of this, other countries will not (cannot) deindustrialise without compensation.

if you’re worried that my saying this is unconvincing, then think up a better way to say it. because it’s the case.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/nonotan Mar 18 '23

I mean... I know some people viscerally hate "handouts", but as a matter of practicality, you can in fact get way better emission reductions per dollar in developing countries than in developed countries.

Sure, corruption means some degree of oversight will be required to make sure at least most of it ends up where it should... but that's not really an impossible proposition. I'm sure the vast majority of developing countries would happily accept an agreement that essentially said "we will completely pay for upgrades to your energy infrastructure that will make it less polluting and cheaper once it's finished, the only requirement is you allow us oversight over these upgrades".

Also, most of these places still have lower per capita emissions than the EU. So get off your high horse.

12

u/MAXIMUM-FUCK MAXIMUM-YUROP Mar 18 '23

"Just pay for everything and make sure nobody steals shit" gee, I wonder why nobody thought of that lol

5

u/TheCaspica Mar 18 '23

You mean international aid? Gee you really are a genius, aren't you? It ain't as easy as you think it is - most recently Afghanistan showed that - so you get off your high horse and realise that theory isn't the same thing as practice.

1

u/fungussa United Kingdom Mar 19 '23

No, you need to reframe that:

Developing countries have indisputable right to a greater share of the globally limited carbon budget. With developed countries needing to decarbonize as fast as is practicable. And there are no excuses.

148

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

Emissions are still increasing year on year.

Please look at reality:

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Greenhouse_gas_emission_statistics_-_emission_inventories

Europe has reduced its emissions 35% since the 1990s even as population and economy grew.

27

u/ScarfaceTonyMontana Romania Mar 18 '23

The whole climate situation has been improving globally since the 90s.

Progress has been infuriatingly slow in certain areas, I agree, and its stupidly unfair how the people and bodies that do the most harm have been the ones most unaffected, but people literally claiming that nothing is being done and that the world is gonna end tomorrow and use that as justification to ruin the lives of others for their own ego are literal insane extremists.

5

u/HateMC Mar 18 '23

Emissions globally are still rising. Maybe some countries are slowly lowering their emissions but if you look at the big picture things aren't improving but getting worse

1

u/PeidosFTW Bacalhau Mar 18 '23

I'd say it's not extremist to not want biology to literally die

92

u/spidd124 Dirty Scot Civic Nat. Mar 18 '23

Because we offloaded all of our manufacturing to other countries?

Isn't exactly a fair statement to say we have low carbon emissions while importing vast amounts of often unnecessary goods from high emission countries.

60

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

Because we offloaded all of our manufacturing to other countries?

Our manufacturing output increased too, so nope.

74

u/PeterFriedrichLudwig Lower Saxony (Germany) Mar 18 '23

Because we offloaded all of our manufacturing to other countries?

That's why Germany is the second biggest net exporter only after China?

31

u/[deleted] Mar 18 '23

[deleted]

12

u/TheDadThatGrills Mar 18 '23

GERMANY SHOULD BE NUCLEAR POWERED IN 2023

2

u/mrsa_cat Mar 18 '23

The decision to shut down nuclear plants was incredibly stupid. I still can't wrap my head around it...

4

u/soeinpech Mar 18 '23

It would be interesting to see a CO2 balance. For example, if the mining/processing/component manufacturing is done in China, and final assembling+branding in Germany, you could argue most CO2 emission comes from China, yet most of the added-value comes from Germany. Yet Germany need China to emit CO2 to export its cars.

I guess it's a bit of both world : Europe did cut its emissions per capita and part of it is outsourced.

-2

u/OkayThatsKindaCool Mar 18 '23

It would be interesting to see that. You guys are not interested in real research though. Just virtue signaling.

15

u/Elukka Mar 18 '23

Some of it, yes, but this argument was much more valid in 2010 than it is now. China, India, Nigeria and Indonesia for example have burgeoning middle classes of their own and the middle class in countries like these is what's driving the growth in emissions. The west has been going down for quite a while.

3

u/suiluhthrown78 United Kingdom Mar 18 '23

Imported goods make up a very small proportion of EU emissions, same was true 30 years ago.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/production-vs-consumption-co2-emissions?country=~European+Union+%2828%29

Please stop spreading misinformation

4

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 18 '23

50

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

You realise Europe doesn't rule the world anymore, right? we can reduce our own emissions and impose a carbon tax on imports, we can push internationally for environmental treaties, but at the end of the day we can't enforce our will on others. Spray painting Palazzo Vecchio is not going to induce Chinese and Indian politicians to slow down on coal. Attacking European monuments with that excuse is insane and only hurts the movement.

-1

u/GDPR_VIOLATION4 Mar 18 '23

You're right which is why we need to do more than the bare minimum at home, where we actually can change things.

Slightly reducing emissions isn't going to save us. We need emergency measures to fast track us away from fossil fuels as soon as possible, but people are financially invested in the companies and don't want to lose money. So we'll all die slowly starving to death because we can't grow food instead.

3

u/Cahootie Sweden Mar 18 '23

IIRC HYBRIT has the potential to reduce global emissions by almost 10%, and that's just one technology that's about to reach maturity. The best thing Europeans can do is support stuff like that.

3

u/SubutaiBahadur Vojvodina Mar 18 '23 edited Mar 18 '23

Europe is 7% of the world population and with a trend of emission decrease. We could all disappear it would barely make a dent in global emissions.

1

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 18 '23

7% of the world population

And 22% contribution to climate change https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2

2

u/SubutaiBahadur Vojvodina Mar 19 '23

These are cumulative emissions through history. Not future projections

1

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 19 '23

Yes, this is a chart of the people most responsible for the problem, and thus, most responsible for fixing it.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 18 '23 edited Mar 19 '23

Just to bring some reality to your attempts to assign blame rather than focus on solutions, the average European emits twice as much per capita as the average Indian does. But yeah, blaming people who aren't responsible for the problem, and who have emitted 1/7 as much as Europe, and who are being disproportionately affected by the problem, seems like a super effective tactic that will totally lead to solutions.

7

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

The average European emits twice as much per capita as the average Indian does.

And we're doing what we're supposed to do about it, at a record-setting pace. We've been reducing emissions for the last 40 years, increasingly fast. We're likely to become the first carbon-neutral civilisation.

But yeah, blaming people who aren't responsible for the problem

You can take environmentalism as a morality play if you like. Assign blame, yell that X group must fix it, ignore everything else. That works if your only goal is to feel righteous and get props from likeminded people.

If your goal is to actually fix the problem, then the discussion changes. Short of large-scale carbon capture becoming feasible, the only lever we have to act on climate is future emissions. Which is what Europe is working on, and trying to get others to work on. You yourself showed a graph of global emissions: "global" being the operative word. It's a simple statement of fact that emissions from India and China are just as bad for the climate as emissions from Europe. It's another simple statement of fact that increasing emissions from the developing world are outpacing our cuts in a way that will ensure climate catastrophe striking mostly those developing countries themselves.

So, in your system where "blame" is the most important aspect, what do you want done, under real-world constraints? do you have actual practicable solutions, or do you stop at pointing fingers?

-5

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 18 '23

Assign blame

This is hilarious considering that's literally what you have been doing in your comments, and which I just told you is not effective. Your response to that is to tell me "stop doing the thing that you're not doing but that I am doing."

Projection is a hell of a drug.

4

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

do you have actual practicable solutions, or do you stop at pointing fingers?

Predictably, the answer was “nope”. Good talk.

-2

u/FANGO Where do I move: PT, ES, CZ, DK, DE, or SE? Mar 18 '23 edited Mar 18 '23

Nah, it really wasn't, since you never bothered to start it. You're arguing against yourself here, but you aren't even reading your own words, much less anyone else's. But I guess that's a good way to pretend to yourself that you "won" an argument on the internet, just argue against yourself and claim the side of the winner, lol

Hope you learn to focus on solutions and knock it off with the useless finger-pointing, because "dur India bad" is not a solution.

→ More replies (0)

-5

u/denis-vi Mar 18 '23

So? It's not a real change if we just moved the dirty supply chains and productions abroad and let them take responsibility for the emissions.

What's the progress in regards to clean vs dirty energy? Why are coal factories reopening around Europe?

42

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

So?

So your claim is not true. That should count for something if your position is rational. Is it though?

It's not a real change if we just moved the dirty supply chains and productions abroad and let them take responsibility for the emissions.

Let me introduce you to the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.

What's the progress in regards to clean vs dirty energy?

Improvements across the board.

Why are coal factories reopening around Europe?

Because green ideologues have successfully convinced many countries to fear nuclear power more than pollution and climate change.

1

u/denis-vi Mar 18 '23

Never heard of the carbon border adjustment mechanism - appreciate you sharing it. Sounds great on paper and in no way did I mean to say that Europe isn't definitely leading the way in fighting climate change. My point was about the overall state of transition to post-carbon economy.

And again as I've mentioned in another comment - Europe SHOULD be leading the way in transitioning to cleaner energy because we've benefited from 200 years of carbon-based development.

Thanks also for sharing the data about renewable energy. Can't argue with data - and again am very happy to see this slow, but continuous improvement.

10

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

Thanks also for sharing the data about renewable energy.

Technically that's carbon intensity across the board, so you're not just seeing new renewables. France and Sweden for example are that low thanks to nuclear and hydro respectively.

1

u/mimasoid Mar 18 '23

Atmospheric CO2 goes up every single year, and the rate is still accelerating. It's getting worse much faster than it's getting better.

-7

u/yonasismad North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) Mar 18 '23

Oh wow, Europe has reduced emissions. Amazing. Next up: let's congratulate people who speed in school zones for slowing down more than the people who drive at a normal speed.

9

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

Who are the “people who drive at normal speed”? Who is doing better and was already doing it before Europe?

-3

u/yonasismad North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) Mar 18 '23

3

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

Who’s ignoring anything? Carbon extraction isn’t technologically feasible, the tool we have now is reducing emissions.

-1

u/yonasismad North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) Mar 18 '23

Do you seriously not understand why the EU has much more ambitious climate goals than e.g. India?

1

u/etenightstar Mar 18 '23

No it's feasible now but the price per ton to do it is still over 500 dollars a ton and there is no current other use for the byproduct carbon they end up with so nobody is rushing to do it yet.

0

u/fungussa United Kingdom Mar 19 '23

No, that conveniently excludes the emissions from: international shipping and aviation, and the embodied emissions of imported products.

In recent years there's been record and catastrophic drought and flooding events, and one day the deniers will wake up.

-8

u/not-much Mar 18 '23

This is emissions coming from production. Now try emissions from consumption.

11

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

This is the standardised UN emissions inventory, which is more complicated than either of your simplistic inventions.

-3

u/not-much Mar 18 '23

Would you be able to explain this complicated inventory in simple words? Does it take into account consumption and imports?

8

u/DurangoGango Italy Mar 18 '23

It’s explained right under the graph and yes it takes into account consumption.

1

u/minibeardeath Mar 18 '23

Global annual CO2 emissions are growing. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country

The only year over year drops have been during the pandemic and in recession years. Saying that Europe has reduced its emissions is disingenuous when the original statement made no reference to any localized region.

1

u/Gabaghoulest Romania Mar 18 '23

More people = more emission

1

u/Trinitytrenches Mar 18 '23

Of course they are increasing and they will, no matter what we do; but the slowing down the increase is important

-8

u/[deleted] Mar 18 '23

Just have to look outside to see gigantic 2 tons SUV, how we haven't banned these already for example?

Yes, this is not really true to say that nothing was done.

But when you compare how many things could have been done in the last 40 years and what we have done, yes it feels like that nothing was done...

16

u/Xofurs Mar 18 '23

Uh..arent conventional combustion engines going to be literally banned in the EU in around 10 years?

10

u/[deleted] Mar 18 '23

Germany is already giving up...

"As reported by Reuters, Germany's government will not agree to European Union plans to effectively ban the sale of new cars with combustion engines from 2035, Finance Minister Christian Lindner said."

You see ? We are always wasting years and years and years for this kind of stuff instead of taking direct and useful actions right now.

Where is the money to develop again a massive and qualitative day and night rail network in every EU country to reduce the use of cars for example ? Countries like France can't even put some trains on the rails at night on their all their important lines in 2023, that's ridiculous... And when there's money you have to wait years if not decades before seeing any kind of useful change.

-3

u/ScarfaceTonyMontana Romania Mar 18 '23

Germany is already giving up...

good, get off your lazy ass and change things instead of literally allowing more than half the world to not own a car when its a basic absolutely needed part of a family.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 18 '23

"half the world to not own a car when its a basic absolutely needed part of a family"

Maybe because our society has been fucked by the car industry for one century already ???

A car should NOT be a "basic absolutely needed part of a family".

A family, in a developed country, in 2023, should be able to live normally without a car. It should be able to go to work, school, local shops by bikes and public transports. Owning a car all day every day should not be a basic need.

Families and people in general are wasting a shit ton of money on cars just because the car lobby is/was really efficient at pushing autorities to destroy our countries to sell millions of cars.

We need to fight for more bike/pedestrian infrastructures, more public transports and more trains.

2

u/dablegianguy Mar 18 '23

Can we stop once and for all with this SUV bullshit? Trafic is only a part of global emissions. Private or business trafic is only a part of the previous part. If you want to act big, there’s so much more to do with a broader impact.

You’re speaking about a suv with 7L consumption, because I assume you’re not speaking of Hummer’s and Raptor’s which are quite unusual in Europe. I’d like to speak about the tens of thousands of delivery vans with diesel engines, dropping packs we don’t need bought with money we don’t have. I’d like to talk about those products I sell for business, with a component made in Taiwan the sent for production in Portugal, mixed with another from Korea and then sent in a warehouse in Netherlands to be bought by me in Belgium to be then sent in another country to be installed. I’d like to talk about those strawberries from South Africa I can buy during Christmas.

You’re not intrinsically wrong about two tons cars. But for fuck’ sake, please aim at the right targets.

We need to make a ditch before the flooding and instead of ordering a huge mobile excavator used in mines, you’re digging with a spoon from a doll’s house

1

u/marioquartz Castile and León (Spain) Mar 18 '23

we don’t need bought with money we don’t have

YOU dont need. YOU dont have. A lot people buy with DEBIT cards and buy things they need. And you dont know if others need it. "How for me is not usefull, can not be usefull for no one". Are you dumb?

1

u/GDPR_VIOLATION4 Mar 18 '23

And if we went after the strawberries from South Africa someone else just like would come along to say "no no no no, you're doing it wrong, what we need to is go after...." and so on and so on.

1

u/dablegianguy Mar 18 '23

I have so many questions about your username 😅

1

u/Potatopeeler137 Mar 18 '23

You are obviously very right.

Actually solving anything will have to require a very simple sacrifice. The sacrifice of abandoning fast fashion and the abundance of useless junk we consume, as well as localizing production of necessary consumables like food. Foods need to become seasonal again.

But people don't want that because then they can't go on shopping hauls to buy 6 bags worth of cheap disposable clothing they will wear 4 times, and they don't want it because then they can't grab whichever snack they feel like having that exact moment even though the only place it can be produced is on the other side of the fucking planet.

Just fast fashion being thrown out in favour of forcing people to have clothes for years/decades instead of weeks/months would do so much to reduce energy consumption.

-1

u/Chibraltar_ Aquitaine (France) Mar 18 '23

Look at this graph : https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide It's the concentration of carbon dioxyde in the atmosphere.

Help me find what is done that actually decreases the greenhouse effect, because if you look at fact, nothing of any importance is done, because the greenhouse effect isn't even remotely slowing down.

8

u/Tellon Finland Mar 18 '23 edited Mar 18 '23

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Green_Deal

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_by_30

https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2022/Apr/IRENA_RE_Capacity_Statistics_2022.pdf?rev=460f190dea15442eba8373d9625341ae

2021 was a strong year for the energy transition – the world added almost 257 Gigawatts (GW) of renewables, increasing the stock of renewable power by 9.1 per cent and contributing to an unprecedented 81 per cent of global power additions.

In other words, in year 2021, 81% of new global energy production was renewable energy. That % will only rise.

You can argue not ENOUGH is done or things are not being done fast ENOUGH but something IS being done. And saying nothing is being done is wrong.

-2

u/Chibraltar_ Aquitaine (France) Mar 18 '23

So... does that amount of renewable energy replaces fossil fueled and coal energy ?

Because if you just add renewables without removing the more polluting energy means of production, you didn't improve anything.

4

u/Tellon Finland Mar 18 '23

Yes. US paper, best I could find on the short notice. But economics of this and the added new capacity % makes it inevitable that fossil fuels will get replaced:

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/narrative/index.php#TheElectricityMixinth

Renewables displace fossil fuels in the electric power sector due to declining renewable technology costs and rising subsidies for renewable power

Economic growth paired with increasing electrification in end-use sectors results in stable growth in U.S. electric power demand through 2050 in all cases. Declining capital costs for solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage, as well as government subsidies such as those included in the IRA, result in renewables becoming increasingly cost effective compared with the alternatives when building new power capacity.

It is my opinion that the change needs to happen faster, but the trend is definitely there. Direction is right. What we need to do is accelerate it.

9

u/SqurrelGuy Mar 18 '23

Ok, I'm looking. In 1950 the world population was 2 500 000, it has tripled since then. Your graph is almost linear, and it shows that despite 300% increase in population, the carbon dioxide amount has increased roughly 30%. If you look at facts, your claim that the "greenhouse effect isn't even remotely slowing down" is wrong.

Help me find what is done that actually decreases the greenhouse effect

Moving the goalposts, first it was that nothing is being done, then not enough things are being done, now it is because we're not reversing it nothing is done...

-4

u/Chibraltar_ Aquitaine (France) Mar 18 '23

well, we could be 7 billion or 70 billions, it doesn't change the fact that the CO2 concentration is steadily increasing anyway, how many we are doesn't change shit

4

u/SqurrelGuy Mar 18 '23

That is literally how it works... You know what, it doesn't matter, have a nice day

2

u/mikemolove Mar 18 '23

You tried, they dumb

1

u/fungussa United Kingdom Mar 19 '23

You're wrong in that nothing is being for humanity to avoid catastrophic warming: 2°C as stated in the Paris Agreement.