[alephnerd]

> If we don’t do something about this...

We can't. We're too late.

China (13 GT), the US (4.6 GT), and India (3 GT) alone represent 51% of global carbon emissions - and at least in India's case, it is growing at a rate of 5%.

Throw in other large polluters like Russia (2 GT), Indonesia (0.8 GT), Iran (0.8 GT), KSA (0.6 GT), Brazil (0.5 GT), and Vietnam (0.5 GT) whose rate of carbon emissions is growing in the 5-10% range and you see there is no path forward.

Any amount of de-carbonization that China or the collective West does is automatically negated by the other countries I listed. At best global carbon emissions stagnate - which by default is going to lead to a 2-3 °C increase in temperatures.

[jmward01]

You conveniently left the US out of that and the US's role in driving global emissions. China is also likely rapidly de-carbonizing right now just like they rapidly spun up. They are an issue, but the US and its policies have a massive impact on this problem. Same with Europe. Rapidly adopting renewables and not externalizing our emissions to other countries would go a long way.

I have seen the argument shift from 'That's a lie. Global warming doesn't exist. Stop pushing regulations for a non-existent problem.' To 'Maybe it does, or there is some human impact but this is all within normal variation and the climate can take some amount of pollution so stop trying to regulate it!' to, I guess the new argument of, 'It's too late so why try? We shouldn't change course because it won't matter so stop trying to regulate the problem away.' It isn't too late. Do something.

[JumpCrisscross]

> China is also likely rapidly de-carbonizing right now

Huh. "China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole" [1].

So "rapidly de-carbonising" is wrong. But decarbonising per se is correct.

[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha...

[jmward01]

Chin's emissions rose by 20% from 2017 to 2024 and then flat-lined in 2025 with emissions expected to decline in 2026. That is what decarbonization looks like, the rate of change has swung massively in the right direction. The .3 in 2025 will likely turn into -1.5 in 2026 and more after that. They have embraced alternative energy because it is now making them money and gaining them influence. That trend won't change and they will keep on decarbonizing because it is the easy, profitable, route.

[JumpCrisscross]

> That is what decarbonization looks like

Sure, I gave you that. But you went further. China is not “rapidly de-carbonizing right now.” It’s forecast to start rapidly decarbonizing in the next decade.

[AuthAuth]

Its only falling per Chinese gov data. The trend since 2019 is for them to downplay emission data and when the next international review comes around we'll have seen that it was actually increasing for the past 3 years and everything will be revised and they will say oh its decreasing starting from now and everyone will forget that the gov stats were lying and take their word that its decreasing.

[defrost]

  NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory, 2 (OCO-2) provides the most complete dataset tracking the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂), the main driver of climate change. Every day, OCO-2 measures sunlight reflected from Earth’s surface to infer the dry-air column-averaged CO₂ mixing ratio and provides around 100,000 cloud-free observations.

[JumpCrisscross]

…and what do those data say about China’s emissions?

[defrost]

There's a multi author decade retrospective report:

  *Observing CO2 from space*: A Decade of progress from NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatories (OCO-2 and OCO-3)

~ https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/toc/10.1002/(ISS...

The take away is that the orbiting readings are bedded in reality and don't contradict what's being released as official ground numbers for China (they have ground reading networks that overlap with internationally staffed / instrument supplied networks)

  (2025) A recent article published in the journal of Earth and Space Science provides a comprehensive evaluation of the latest version of the OCO-2 total column CO2 retrievals against data collected from a global ground-based network known as the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON).

Comparisons of the v11.1 Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) XCO2 Measurements With GGG2020 TCCON - https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024EA00...

~ https://www.tccon.caltech.edu/

  (2026) We provide the first global comparison between OCO-2/3 with COCCON observations to evaluate the mean differences between the ground- and space-based data sets and identify regions where these differences are most pronounced.

Comparing v11.2 OCO-2 and v11 OCO-3 CO Retrievals With Ground-Based COCCON Measurements - https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025EA00...

[defrost]

I'd love to know- ATM I've been on the hop all day and haven't had the time or the access to have a look see .. NASA datasets have less live website presentation this last year.

The main point to be landed by that terse comment was that the world isn't merely reliant on CCP statements.

[AuthAuth]

China is not rapidly de-carbonizing. They've put off even starting to transition to clean energy by 15 years and they lag behind the other nations. They shouldnt be where the US is as the US has done an awful job. They should be where the EU is.

[Hikikomori]

In 2025 China installed more solar than the US has, and almost more than what the EU has in total. About the same for wind. So yes they're doing it an extreme pace compared to US/EU as we're comparing 1 year to what the EU/US has done for decades.

[AuthAuth]

ok and in 2025 they installed more coal than the US and EU has in total whats your point?

[Hikikomori]

That your initial point is wrong? They are installing massive amounts of renewable.

Not sure what your point is, just posting lies?

[AuthAuth]

They are installing some renewables and some non renewables. The scale of the non renewables is far larger than their non renewables. The damage being down completely outweighs the solar they've installed. Its good they're finally starting to do something but its about 15 years to late.

[alephnerd]

Both China and the US have similar carbon emission growth rates (0.3-0.5%).

And that does nothing to stop the collective 8 GT of carbon emissions coming from India and the other countries I listed with an average emissions increase rate of around 3-5%.

[tim-projects]

A lot if this industrialisation is actually factories making products that are outsourced manufacturing. So it doesn't really make sense to say its China, India's or Vietnam's fault, when most of the products are being shipped to the US and EU and are not necessarily local born companies.

[cute_boi]

Despite all the pollution, 24% of Indians live below the lower-middle-income poverty line of $4.20 per day...

[alephnerd]

Yes, and?

That's why nothing will happen.

Developing countries like India, Indonesia, and Vietnam are continuing to expand their emissions as they industrialize. All are expected to have an GDP growth rate in the 6-8% range over the next decade, as will their peers across Asia, so the carbon footprint globally will only increase.

Even China's emissions rate aren't decreasing - they're stagnant, which is a good shift, but not enough to turn the tide given how large China's existing carbon footprint is.

Edit: can't reply

> but they're not going to expand by taking on coal and fossil fuels...

India [0], Vietnam [1], and other large industrializing nation in Asia have all doubled down on expanding coal usage over the last 6 months. And that's ignoring increased usage of NatGas and Oil.

[0] - https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-will-use-more-...

[1] - https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/vietnam-looks-more-c...

[peterashford]

Yeah, but they're not going to expand by taking on coal and fossil fuels. The third world is taking on green energy alternatives at a great rate. Not least because it's cheaper and more convenient. These countries can grow without the damage that marked the Western world through the industrial revolution onwards

[suzzer99]

What is Western Europe's #?

[alephnerd]

1.1 GT combined but shrinking yearly by 1-3%, which isn't enough to make up for the combined increase in carbon emissions from India, ASEAN, MENA, LatAm, and Russia.

[myaccountonhn]

Are those domestic emissions only? Or do we include emissions from purchasing goods from other countries?

[alephnerd]

Overall emissions.

But the UK and EU (the only large polluters who have even considered carbon tariffs) have largely watered them down - for example, yesterday with the UK increasing it's duty free steel quota for India [0] as Tata Steel owns much of the UK's steel capacity and demand (JLR is a Tata company). Add to that the EU's largest steel maker is owned by India's Mittal family (AcrelorMittal) and European conglomerates like Renault [1] are expanding manufacturing in markets like India, which means using Indian steel.

And all of that ignores domestic growth in all those countries. Base GDP growth rates are expected to be in the 6.5-8% for India and ASEAN despite deglobalization because domestic markets are growing.

[0] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-14/india-win...

[1] - https://www.reuters.com/world/india/renault-plans-boost-indi...