Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by yumraj 3300 days ago
> in the shadow of the damage they have already done. Really?

See here: http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/Breakdown-of-Electricity-Gene...

U.S. generated, per 2014 data, 1612 TWh from Coal and 1272 TWh from Gas. China generated 3681 TWh from Coal and 91 TWh from Gas.

Compare this to India, which generated a mere 800 TWh from Coal and 89 TWh from Gas.

And this when India has more than 4 times the population of US and according to some estimates, unverified, more population than China.
2 comments
specializeded 3300 days ago
The article is comparing India to India, the commenter is comparing India to India, you're not.

A country having less output compared to more developed countries isn't surprising, nor the issue.

link
maldeh 3300 days ago
By your statement I presume you are alluding to India sourcing ~70% of its energy consumption from coal (compared to ~40% by the US), according to this source. I should point out that the parent poster's dataset comes from 2014, whereas the article is talking about a much more recent transition towards renewables (the Paris accord was signed 2015 and India took part circa 2016).

The OP's point is still reasonable in terms of both absolute magnitude as well as per-capita, in that India, as a developing country and yet one of the most populous countries on the planet, consumes far less energy than developed states and is not as immediate a threat to life as we know it on a global basis, such as the US is. Indian policies towards coal consumption, no matter how progressive they can get, cannot hope to match the immediate impact their counterparts in the US can achieve today (and choose not to), and the current US administration does not really have grounds to point fingers elsewhere.

link
rajathagasthya 3300 days ago
> They burn a massive amount of coal compared to most countries.

What part of this is comparing India to India?

link
belorn 3300 days ago
Interesting site, especially when comparing neighboring countries. France and Germany, the Scandinavian countries, or Chile and Argentina. Chile for example has less than half the population of Argentina but burn 800% more coal in total during 2014. Germany has 30% more population than France but burn 1500% more coal. Denmark is half the population than Sweden but burn 500% more coal.

How valuable is knowing population size in order to predict coal usage?

link