I'm definitely biased here since I spent years kayaking and have only gone paddleboarding twice, and I also definitely don't want to just be all "lol skill issue", but I think this might be an issue with your (kayak) paddling technique. You should be using your whole torso rather than your arms and shoulders
Mate you ever rowed a boat? That shit is hard work, it goes below the bike for sure
Of course, the pedalo manages to combine the worst of both worlds and seems to exist solely as a way to work your quads out without looking like you're doing a gym session
You’ve been continuously claiming that EU has per capita emissions on part with China. This is false.
Then source that. I gave you a source, the same website you used first, and it shows exactly what I said. Here it is again, just to be clear. Energy consumption is not the same as emissions.
Meanwhile, the elephant in the room is that Europe has had far higher consumption-based emissions historically
I've never argued Europe's higher historic emissions, but no matter who has done more historically we still all need to stop producing so much pollution now. China emitting less historically will not save us if it produces more in future.
China has a clear plan for phasing out fossils and it has been consistently ahead of schedule in doing so. Same cannot be said for Europe.
And like I said, I hope it works, but the actual numbers right now are that China now produces as much as Europe and if current trends continue it will be producing more. If Europe has no plan and China has such a great one, why are the outcomes today the same?
Which does not address the fact that consumption-based emissions, the actual damage being done to the environment, do not even have that gap. So now that we've established that I was not actually lying, care to address any of that?
No, it isn't. You said highest in China and then gave the average for China as your source.
To get the average for EU, you’d have to add up all the countries together. What you’re doing is cherry picking pars of Europe and comparing them to China’s average.
I'm literally taking the entire EU average from your source. I have been consistently and completely clear about that. Why are you lying so blatantly? Seriously, quote me cherry picking just part of the EU. I can sure as hell quote you cherry-picking specific parts of it.
Once again, averaged out usage per capita across China is on par with averaged out with poorest parts of Europe. Meanwhile, usage in wealth European countries, is far higher.
So not what you said in your previous comment then. Besides that, I've been using the average figures for the entire EU the whole time. Your own link has that figure. I told you where it is as well. Energy usage is close, and consumption-based emissions are identical.
In case you weren’t aware, emissions are a byproduct of energy production.
Again: solar panels vs coal. There is not a 1:1 correlation. Stop ignoring that. It's not helpful to anyone.
You’re complaining that I didn’t reply to stuff you edited in after I replied to you?
It's literally the first thing I said in my first comment. I edited in a source to my second comment, I didn't edit the first one. Either way, you've seen it now, so you can respond to it.
You’re once again setting up a disingenuous argument here.
Lmao, I post numbers for entire countries, you post an article about literally eight windmills, and I'm being disingenuous? Okay lol. Call me when Germany more than doubles its coal consumption per person to catch up to China.
On the other hand, Europe is nowhere close to pursuing a meaningful transition.
Considering that Europe no longer pollutes more per person than China (again, consumption-based and averaged across the EU and China so that rich and poor, industrialised or not, imports and exports, all is accounted for) while still trending downward while China trends up, this does not seem like a reasonable claim. Europe's transition is already happening, and the numbers bear it out. Should it have happened earlier? Yes. Should it be happening faster? Also yes. But neither of those things change the fact that Europe is polluting less over time, while China is doing the opposite, or the fact that there is no longer a gap in emissions per person.
I hope China's plans work well. I still have to live in the world, and if it's choked by CO2 then it does me no good being able to say "oh well it's China's/America's/Europe's/anyone else's fault". We need everyone to do their part. But the plans do not change the current reality, which is the thing I originally commented on.
What the map clearly shows is that the highest consumption in China is on part with the lowest consumption in EU
The map shows the average across all of China. There is no breakdown of any national subdivisions. Where are you getting figures for the highest consumption in China?
it’s far more meaningful than focusing on emissions.
Why? Energy consumption is not what's damaging the environment. Emissions are.
EU countries are largely deinudstrialized and they import much of the necessities from places like China.
I used consumption-based emissions specifically to account for the balance of imports. Please, at least actually read what I said.
And last I checked burning increasingly more coal is precisely what EU is doing. In fact, Germany is even dismantling wind farms to create more coal plants euobserver.com/green-economy/157364
Again, you're looking at one part of a much larger entity and ignoring the broader picture. While I do not want to see Germany, or anyone else, opening new coal mines, single-digit numbers of wind turbines are not going to save the day here.
In 2022, Germany burnt 28 petajoules of coal per million people, whereas China burnt 62 petajoules of coal per million. Values here for Germany and China, divided by populations taken from wikipedia. You'll also notice that Germany's consumption is trending down, while China's isn't.
Okay? I'm sure it would vary significantly across different parts of China too, or across different parts of any individual country. I chose the EU as a whole because then we're dealing with an entity on a similar scale to China, and a much closer approximation of "the west" than any one country of five-ten million people.
You've completely failed to respond to the fact that energy consumption does not directly correlate with emissions. If you're using twice as much energy as me but you're getting it all from solar panels and I'm getting it all from burning coal, which one of us is doing more harm to the environment?
Your link shows exactly what I said. EU and China close together, US way above. Go to the chart view and you can pick the EU as a single entity, plus you get the change over time.
Of course, what I actually said was not "energy usage". I said consumption-based emissions. You can get those here and you'll see that the slim gap between the EU and China vanishes altogether, plus the direction of travel changes. Energy consumption alone does not account for the way that that energy is being generated, something which seems pretty pertinent considering the article we're commenting under.
China is on par with the EU for consumption-based emissions per capita these days. Better per capita than the US still, but the direction of travel for both is narrowing that gap over time
It hasn't changed. The proportion of police carrying firearms in England and Wales (Scotland and Northern Ireland operate separately, so E&W is the biggest UK data source) has held steady at about 5%. There are typically fewer than 10 total incidents in which the police actually fire a gun each year. Of course, it only takes one to result in a story like this one.
Realistically, a long, long time yet. Let's take the Soviet Union in WW2 as an example of fighting on despite horrendous casualties. If we look at only military deaths and not civilian ones, it lost about 5.4% of its 1940 population. If Ukraine were to sustain the same proportion of deaths today against its 2022 population, it'd add up to two million. Even Russian estimates of Ukrainian deaths are nowhere remotely close to that sort of number yet.
Obviously that'd be a truly horrific outcome. But in terms of the raw number of people available, Ukraine is a very long way from exhaustion.