[alephnerd]

Climate change doesn't divvy impact based on per capita usage.

And large countries and blocs like the US, China, EU, India, etc would survive in a world with significant climate crises. So the incentive to change doesn't exist.

And this is why the world will burn.

[applfanboysbgon]

The Chinese government invested ~$1 trillion in clean energy in 2025, while the Chinese economy had a further ~$2 trillion in growth surrounding EVs, batteries, and solar. You talk about "no incentive to change", but things are actively changing. What more would you like China to do, in concrete terms? Stop manufacturing for the West, even though that will, as aforementioned, likely result in a net increase in emissions when Western countries resume their substantially worse per-capita manufacturing for themselves? Or perhaps you would like China to cull its population by half for you? I'm interested in hearing your proposal.

[alephnerd]

> I'm interested in hearing your proposal

I have no proposal because to a certain extent you are correct.

That said, investing trillions in GreenTech does nothing when China is still emitting 13 gigatons of CO2, and it takes the next 7 countries combined to reach that number. Additionally, India will likely end up emitting a similar amount as China within a decade as well.

Only the leadership of the US, China, and India can decide on a roadmap on how to reduce CO2 usage globally, and everything else is just rhetoric.

[leonidasrup]

Personaly I would like to see China invest less in renewables and more in nuclear power. If France could replace its coal power plants with nuclear power plants in 1970s, 1980s then China should be capable to do it.

China endured famines for centuries, introduction of nitrogen fertilizers helped to solve this problem.

"The meeting of Mao Zedong and Nixon in 1972 changed drastically the fundamental relation between China and USA. In 1973 China contracted importation of 13 large-scale ammonia plants with 330,000 t/y capacity and urea plants with 500-600,000 t/y capacity with the companies of USA, Japan and Europe."

https://kagakushi.org/iwhc2015/papers/21.MineTakeshi.pdf

[peterashford]

Climate change is the result of aggregate human actions. What we contribute per human is exactly the metric to use.

[card_zero]

Or is it the result of government policies? Then we should look to the governments in control of the biggest portions.

[alphabeta3r56]

Out of these two, only EU and US are showing reluctance to change quickly. Both China and India depend heavily on imported fossil fuels and for them solar is as much of a sovereignty issues as it is pollution, and then climate.

[ZeroGravitas]

The EU also depends heavily on imported fossil fuels. They just have more politicians that have been bought off.