Already rich nations are blaming India for the failure of UN climate talks but there are 300+ million Indians who live on $1/day & it's unfair for the US, UK, Germany to demand India not burn coal before they become developed enough to afford natural gas & nuclear
It's especially hypocritical for the USA, UK, & Germany to demand India agree to quit coal at the *very same moment* that all three nations are *returning* to coal
The return to coal by the US, UK, and Germany is likely to be temporary, but all three nations became rich burning huge quantities of coal in the past, and so it's unethical that they demand that India, where 500M people will still use wood/dung in 2030, immediately phase it out
What nobody talks about is that the main reason the US reduced emissions 22% below 2005 levels, and the EU reduced emissions 26% below 1990 levels, because of cheap natural gas, not because of UN agreements or any climate policies
And the irony of ironies is that the reason the world has temporarily moved back to coal is, in part, because of under-investment in oil and gas production due to... you got it, climate change shareholder activism
If rich nations really cared about climate change they would have had UN talks focused on expanding nuclear energy, the only scalable substitute for fossil fuels, instead of seeking to make energy expensive, and development harder, for poor nations
Correction: the number of Indians who live on $2 or less per day in 2021 is 134M
This is the best most recent data I could find. Please reply with better data if you have it. 🙏🏻
Coal has been a major driver of its poverty decline
If India had access to cheap nat gas like Europe & the US it would use much more of it.
Yes, India has nuclear, but it has, for reasons @samirsaran can explain, failed to scale it up. Hopefully that will change, but we should not hold India to a different standard in mean time.
One of the problems with India’s big solar expansion, as I learned upon visiting in 2016, is lack of natural gas and hydro to manage intermittency. Coal, plants, like nuclear plants, do not ramp up and down well.
The $2/day number is in PPP
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
California is planning on shutting down this nuclear plant in 2024-25 and replacing it with solar farms and fossil fuels. In the name of the environment
San Francisco leaders say they want to stop drugs from killing 700+ people/year but in quieter moments they say they can’t
“We can’t end overdoses until we end poverty, until we end racism,” said the head of the SF’s drug OD prevention program washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
It’s ridiculous, of course. Amsterdam, Lisbon & all other civilized cities don’t let hundreds of people die on the streets. They shut down deadly open air drug markets, arrest dealers, and mandat rehab as an alternative to jail
The reason SF’s leaders won’t do this is because they believe the drug dealers are victims of oppression, and that the police and criminal justice system are evil
I know that sounds ridiculous, and it is ridiculous, but it’s also true
A few weeks ago I was honored to testify to the San Francisco Grand Jury about why SF city government is neglecting its moral & legal responsibility to prevent hundreds of people from dying preventable drug deaths.
The members had read "San Fransicko" with great interest.
I am saddened and angry, but not surprised, given my research, that a member of the SF Board of Supervisors is now attacking me for writing a book documenting how she and others on the Board could immediately save hundreds of lives, and why they aren't.
I love San Francisco
I moved to the SF in 1993 to work on radical Left causes, moved to Berkeley in '98, & dated my wife, who lived in the Haight, & lived there part-time, from 2009-11
I wrote "San Fransicko" bc I'm heart-broken over what SF Govt is doing to the City.
Over the last year, a growing number of progressives have pointed to police killings of unarmed black men, rising carbon emissions and extreme weather events, and the killing of trans people as proof that the US has failed to take action on racism, climate change, and transphobia
While Biden begs OPEC to produce more oil, France’s President uses the energy crisis to announce that “We will, for the first time in decades, start building nuclear plants.”
Which one of them looks like the stronger leader?
Recap:
- Japan, France, and Britain have all recently announced plans to restart and/or build new nuclear plants
- The US is shutting down nuclear plants
- Calif. Gov. @gavinnewsom is moving ahead with plans to shut down our last nuclear plant despite on-going blackouts
By 2020, the US had reduced its emissions 22% below 2005 levels. The reason nobody talks about this is because it was mostly thanks to replacing coal with fracked nat gas, which emits half the CO2 as coal, and which had nothing to do with UN climate agreements or climate policies
The same thing happened in Europe. EU had by 2020 reduced its emissions 26% below 1990 levels, mostly due to replacing coal with natural gas, and closing dirtier coal plants in Eastern Europe, neither of which had anything to do with UN climate agreements