Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumShocking! China Burns Far More Coal Annually Than Thought Or Officially Admitted - NYT
BEIJING China, the worlds leading emitter of greenhouse gases from coal, has been burning up to 17 percent more coal a year than the government previously disclosed, according to newly released data. The finding could complicate the already difficult efforts to limit global warming.
Even for a country of Chinas size, the scale of the correction is immense. The sharp upward revision in official figures means that China has released much more carbon dioxide almost a billion more tons a year according to initial calculations than previously estimated.
The increase alone is greater than the whole German economy emits annually from fossil fuels.
Ed. - Emphasis added.
Officials from around the world will have to come to grips with the new figures when they gather in Paris this month to negotiate an international framework for curtailing greenhouse-gas pollution. The data also pose a challenge for scientists who are trying to reduce Chinas smog, which often bathes whole regions in acrid, unhealthy haze.
EDIT
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/world/asia/china-burns-much-more-coal-than-reported-complicating-climate-talks.html?_r=0
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 719 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Shocking! China Burns Far More Coal Annually Than Thought Or Officially Admitted - NYT (Original Post)
hatrack
Nov 2015
OP
Solero
(10 posts)1. China won't do much to address it either
They think it's a Western plot to strangle the Chinese economy.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)3. Brazil and Indonesia/Malaysia also say that about forest reserves
"you cut all YOUR trees down, you have no right to put orangutans and primitives above palm oil" (neatly forgetting that that developmentalism is super-colonialist)
back in the 70s they also said that about cautions that maybe deliberately ladling millions of people they can't feed or educate isn't a good idea ...
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)2. Who'd have thunk it?
What with their clear skies and all.
NickB79
(19,274 posts)4. So much for earlier claims they were releasing less carbon/burning less coal
http://qz.com/364886/china-grew-its-economy-last-year-without-any-extra-coal/
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/25/3694669/chinas-missing-carbon-emissions/
China grew its economy last year without any extra coal
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/25/3694669/chinas-missing-carbon-emissions/
New Study Attributes Fewer Carbon Emissions To China. So Where Did They Go?
NickB79
(19,274 posts)5. So, the estimate that we'll lock in 2C of warming by 2036 is probably not accurate
China has released much more carbon dioxide almost a billion more tons a year according to initial calculations than previously estimated.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112793146
It has been calculated that to have a 66 per cent chance of limiting warming to 2 °C, cumulative emissions from 2011 must be limited to 1000 GtCO2. The UN report, however, says well have burned through 75 per cent of this carbon budget by 2030. That means we could only emit another 250 GtCO2 after 2030 which means well bust the budget in around 2036 assuming emissions stay above 40 GtCO2 per year.
So, maybe 2025-2030 instead?
Nihil
(13,508 posts)6. Yes but don't forget the silver lining ...
This advance of the timetable means that a whole lot more people are going
to be seeing the effects first-hand rather than just hand-waving them away
with a "Well, I'll be dead by then" glib response.
Front-row seats for major catastrophe!
The view will be good but the tickets are probably going to cost the Earth ...