Governments could enforce laws to reduce their emissions, but they don't.
0x815
The only way to measure it is where it is produced. This is what this and other reports are doing. Governments could reduce their emissions, especially in countries where they are high. It's not the case, though.
This is not what I meant. It is, of course, a matter of production and the political framework for it. What I mean is that -in addition to that- we should have more transparency across supply chains. And China is one of the countries which opposes this transparency.
Again, this is not about assigning blame. This is just a simple fact.
It's not just Amazon, it's also Temu, Shein, and the Chinese shops in that context as the article suggests. The numbers would be a bit different if there would be more transparency in supply chains and we could assign emissions -also- where they are consumed and not 'only' where they are produced. But this needed more transparency how and where these products are produced.
This is not a blame game. Humanity is failing as a whole as the climate doesn't know borders or politics as we know. It is important that we track numbers, though. As the report says:
Historical CO2 emissions matter for climate change, because there is a finite “carbon budget” that can be released into the atmosphere before a given level of global warming is breached.
For example, in order to limit warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, only around 2,800GtCO2 can be added to the atmosphere, counting all emissions since the pre-industrial period [...] Cumulative emissions since 1850 will reach 2,607CO2 by the end of 2024, according to Carbon Brief’s new analysis, meaning that some 94% of the 1.5C budget will have been used up.
We are all doing too little (and too late?). Climate change has already been affecting all countries across all continents for some time. What we needed imo is more global collaboration, but it doesn't seem to happen.
Why is it that some people frequently say something that Ukraine has 'signed treaties', or 'the West must not cross red lines' ...
All this without naming the aggressor in this war which is Russia. Russia permanently violates airspace of Poland, Romania, Moldova. Russia deploys sabotage activities in multiple countries across Europe, in the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, espionage activities in the Irish Sea. Russia gets decisive support by China in its war in Ukraine. North Korea is sending troops. Iran has been sending drones.
What consequences should that have on the compliance of treaties by countries, @drolex@sopuli.xyz?
@NaibofTabr@infosec.pub No, investing your money into your own hardware and software isn't protectionism. That's obviously the right thing to do, even more so with regard to the current geopolitical landscape.
Breivik wore a dark suit, white shirt and brown tie. Both sides of his head were shaved to form the letter "Z".
The letter "Z" has been a symbol of support for Russia's war in Ukraine and Breivik on Tuesday described Russian President Vladimir Putin as "the foremost defender of Europeans globally".
I also agree. He doesn't appear to be serious about getting parole ....
How is that 'protectionism' if you develop your own technology to gain independence? As someone already wrote in this thread, Europe can support Open Source projects, decentralization. That's good for everyone.
This is basically the same what China does to non-Chinese companies in China, although Beijing has a lot more protectionist rules than Europe or almost any other bloc or country.
In addition to that from another source, the Climate Action Tracker for China:
Policies and action against fair share: Insufficient
NDC (nationally determined contributions ) target against modelled domestic pathways: Highly insufficient
NDC target against fair share: Insufficient
Net Zero Target = Year 2060: Comprehensiveness rated as Poor
Overall rating: Highly insufficient