Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Scottish comedian Frankie Boyle proposes cannibalism.

If everyone ate exactly one person, they would cut their carbon footprint in half.

You would think with China being one of the countries who signed the 2016 Paris Agreement to combat climate change, the communist nation might have made some strides in the years since. Well, they did, only not in a positive way.

According to a report by the Rhodium Group, a group that provides “economic data analytics and policy insight” to both the private and public sectors, reported that “for the first time since national greenhouse gas emissions have been measured, China’s annual emissions exceeded those of all developed countries combined” in 2019.

The report noted:

Based on our newly updated preliminary estimates for 2019, global emissions—including emissions of all six Kyoto gases, inclusive of land-use and forests and international bunkers—reached 52 gigatons of CO2-equivalent in 2019, a 11.4% increase over the past decade. China alone contributed over 27% of total global emissions, far exceeding the US—the second highest emitter—which contributed 11% of the global total. For the first time, India edged out the EU-27 for third place, coming in at 6.6% of global emissions.

Judging by those numbers, China has 2.5 times the emissions than the U.S., who came in second, and four times the emissions of third place India.

But that’s not all. Since 1990, China has “more than tripled” their emissions.


https://www.mrctv.org/blog/report-chinas-carbon-emissions-greater-all-other-developed-countriescombined?fbclid=IwAR1WJVlHD6woeP5qPGXnZfwynuhhitYnouhu6gvCdQ9-JVyg2x0_hL_fe7w

In recent years, the renewable technology sector has grown, particularly in solar, wind, and electric vehicles. This positive trend is welcome and must continue.
But to reduce emissions, we need to stop burning fossil fuels. Without carbon capture and storage, that means progressively phasing out coal, oil, and gas.
This means early retirement of existing fossil fuel infrastructure, particularly in developing countries that are currently increasing their stock of infrastructure despite cancelling some projects.
As fossil fuel infrastructure declines, low carbon infrastructure has to grow to replace it, while still maintaining security of energy supply. For this to happen with higher levels of renewable energy penetration, we will need new technologies, such as batteries and power demand management.

Very few scientists are happy to answer this question, particularly in a public forum.
Some are concerned the wrong answer may slowdown current mitigation efforts. Others argue it is not our role as scientists to prejudge what is feasible. Yet others argue that feasibility changes over time.
I see my role as a scientist to point out the obstacles and challenges, not just tell the positive news stories so others can sleep well at night. Understanding feasibility is important to adequately plan for adaptation and to ensure we get mitigation policies right.
Yes, I think “well below” two degrees is feasible in a model, in a theoretical sense. But not in practice. Why not?
First, policy will move along slower than expected because politicians have to balance competing objectives, and it is hard to see that climate will be the policy area that trumps all others.
Second, I am confident we will make technological progress in key areas, with government and business support, but I am less confident we can retire existing fossil fuel infrastructure at the required rates.
Third, carbon dioxide removal technologies are technically feasible, but I am sceptical that we can reach the scale of carbon dioxide removal required.
And finally, the most challenging mitigation will be in the countries that most desperately need economic growth.
My pessimism does not mean we should not try. It is important to distinguish between ambition and feasibility, and we can’t preclude technological, political, or social breakthroughs.
The only hope, is to hope that I am wrong.

You would think with China being one of the countries who signed the 2016 Paris Agreement to combat climate change, the communist nation might have made some strides in the years since. Well, they did, only not in a positive way.

Ya well according to the CCP they only lost 5,900 or sum such to COVID.So how far off can the possibly be

And it snowed today on and off for about an hour,none of it stuck as the rain has taken over