Two Elephants In The 'Climate Change CO2 Production' Room
Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,
Noah Smith has a question: What about per capita emissions? I have answers.
Our World in Data, Per Capita and Annual CO2 Emissions
bUT wHAT aBOut per cApITA
bUT wHAT aBOut per cApITA pic.twitter.com/GIWeBGRUEh
— Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦 (@Noahpinion) August 28, 2023
Per capita emissions in the US are the worlds highest, but they are also crashing. China per capita emissions are rising fast.
And check out India. It has passed China as the world’s most populous country. Where is that headed?
Per Capita and Annual Emissions by Country and the World
Our World in Data, Per Capita and Annual CO2 Emissions
World per capita CO2 emissions have stabilized largely because of the US and EU. Total emissions are another matter.
The world population is increasing so there is a continued increase in carbon production.
Improving Standards of Living
For global standards of living to improve, there will need to be more energy production.
US standards of living rose by increasing fossil fuel production. The US and EU are now telling the world, that’s a no-no.
Instead of using cheaper natural gas or coal, we tell developing countries they can’t. Europe has carbon border taxes to prevent it.
CBAM Tax the Poor
On December 22, 2022 I commented EU Imposes the World’s Largest Carbon Tax Scheme, Inflationary Madness Sets In
Spotlight Africa
Let’s tune into a Tweet Thread by Faten Aggad Senior Advisor Climate Diplomacy @AfricanClimateF.
1) What is the logic behind the CBAM? The EU introduced ambitious decarbonization measures for its industry=> risk of carbon leakage (companies shifting production to more tolerant jurisdictions) => industrial exodus from EU with major socio-economic impact & no climate impact.
— Faten Aggad (@fatenaggad) December 13, 2022
In its report on CBAM, UNCTAD also looked at this, looking at the only comparable case to CBAM (California’s cap-and-trade program) concluding: "system has not reduced carbon leakage". https://t.co/2e81J4d7wG
— Faten Aggad (@fatenaggad) December 13, 2022
...the only effect CBAM would have is a resource shift whereby clean energy capacity in already under-resourced countries will be shifted for export production while industry aimed at local consumption and energy access wl depend on dirty fuels. Energy transition 4 Africa anyone?
— Faten Aggad (@fatenaggad) December 13, 2022
“The only effect CBAM would have is a resource shift whereby clean energy capacity in already under-resourced countries will be shifted for export production while industry aimed at local consumption and energy access will depend on dirty fuels.“
Another Twitter Question
Many would dispute your assumption, but as you said, assume it's true.
— Mike "Mish" Shedlock (@MishGEA) August 27, 2023
US and Canada freely admit their policies have negative benefits vs doing nothing!
The free market is far more likely to do something that makes sense.
A Word about China and Solar Panels
We insist China is dumping solar panels so Biden demands they be made here.
— Mike "Mish" Shedlock (@MishGEA) August 27, 2023
Roof solar panels are one thing that arguably makes sense in sunny areas, but we tariff the hell out of them, raising costs so no one wants to install them.
How stupid is that?
The Cost of Soup and Solar Panels is About to Increase, Thank President Biden
For more discussion, please see The Cost of Soup and Solar Panels is About to Increase, Thank President Biden
Climate Stupidity Canadian Style
Please consider Climate Stupidity Canadian Style
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubles down on carbon taxes, hammering Canadian farms and raising prices for everyone.
Trudeau proposes Canada carbon taxes to be as high or higher than any place else in the world in order to prevent carbon leakage.
This is despite the fact that Canada’s own studies suggest a negative benefit to the economy.
Canada’s 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan Fiscal and Economic Impact
Fiscal and Economic Impact
Our estimate of the economic impact captures the loss in employment and investment income that would result from the federal fuel charge.
Differential impacts on the returns to capital and wages, combined with differences in the distribution of employment and investment income drive the variation in household net costs across provinces. When the economic impact is combined with the fiscal impact, the net cost increases for all households, reflecting the overall negative economic impact of the federal fuel charge
Let’s sum it up this way. You gain $699 in Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, you lose your job.
And for what? If Canada stopped all carbon emissions tomorrow it would not even register, except for the Canadian economy which would crash.
China Abandons Clean Energy Goals Making U.S. Efforts Painful and Pointless
Also note, China Abandons Clean Energy Goals Making U.S. Efforts Painful and Pointless
Heritage Foundation:
It was a bad week for anyone who thought China would cooperate on emissions reduction. President Xi Jinping reiterated that his country would set its own path on the issue and not be influenced by outside factors, according to the Washington Post and Bloomberg. This contradicts Xi’s 2015 Paris Agreement pledges to reduce its carbon emissions at the latest after 2030.
This should not be news, because Xi gave the same message last fall. In October 2022, he said that China would not abandon coal-fired power plants before renewables could substitute for the lost fossil fuel.
Hooray for China?!
China leads the world in EV production. It is using more coal-fired plants to do so.
Cost is one thing now, it’s another inflationary kettle of smelly fish when the need for batteries skyrockets. No one has ever scaled EVs to estimate the mining costs and infrastructure costs if everyone did the same thing.
Electric Vehicles for Everyone?
On July 19, I asked Electric Vehicles for Everyone? If the Dream Was Met, Would it Help the Environment?
My follow-up post was What Do MishTalk Readers Think About “Electric Vehicles for Everyone?”
Math Does Not Add Up
The EV math does not add up in the EU or here. But here we go anyway.
The Shocking Truth About Biden’s Proposed Energy Fuel Standards
In case you missed it, please consider The Shocking Truth About Biden’s Proposed Energy Fuel Standards
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NHTSA did an impact assessment of 4 fuel standard proposals and compared them to the cost of doing nothing. Guess what.
The NHTSA conclude: “Net benefits [of stricter mile standards] for passenger cars remain negative across alternatives” vs doing nothing at all.
See the above link for details and charts.
* * *
