Company and PhilosophyThe dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

philosophical debates and companies.
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 13:06

We mentioned it yesterday with ABC2019 here: pollution-air/oms-la-pollution-de-l-air-7-millions-de-morts-en-2012-t13166-10.html#p382698 . The fact is that we tolerate and accept many more prohibitions and restrictions on our freedoms in the face of a virus than against air pollution or the fight against global warming, which is much more dangerous.....WHY?

Air pollution in China currently kills AT LEAST 25 a month ... It is AT LEAST 000 times more than the coronavirus ... See calculations here: pollution-air/oms-la-pollution-de-l-air-7-millions-de-morts-en-2012-t13166-10.html#p382714

Global warming will claim hundreds of millions of lives in the coming decades!

Yet we fight the corona ... uh the coron ... es! : Mrgreen: WHY?

Will an ecological dictatorship be necessary to save the climate? Some people are asking the question ... And this may be THE main lesson to be learned from the coronavirus crisis!

Debate: Are dictatorships more effective in fighting global warming?

Some are convinced: authoritarian regimes, in particular China, would be better equipped than democracies to take the necessary measures and stop global warming. In partnership with the Film Festival and forum International Human Rights Center (FIFDH), Courrier international helps you to disentangle the true from the false.

Asia is responsible for the major part of CO2 emissions in the world: China leads the most polluting countries, India is in third position and Japan, South Korea and Indonesia are among the first twelve. But Asian populations are also the most vulnerable to climate disasters. Glaciers are melting in Tibet, the rains on which farmers depend are less predictable, storms are becoming more violent and rising sea levels threaten large cities like Jakarta, Manila, Bombay and Shanghai.

Overall, governments in this part of the world recognize the magnitude of the problem, with the unfortunate exception of Australia, whose conservative government rejects climate responsibility [it was pinned again at the start year, for its slowness to react to the forest fires ravaging the country]. Its refusal to show the way by reducing its emissions only reinforces a thesis increasingly supported both by Asian environmentalists and by autocrats smelling there a means of serving their interests, according to which a crisis as serious as global warming (assuming that it is of human origin) can only be mitigated by resorting to the solid grip of an authoritarian regime. Because democracies, where special interests prevail and the reluctance of voters to make difficult choices, are out of breath and escape the task.

China, green leader by default

(...)


Suite: https://www.courrierinternational.com/a ... hauffement

Source (in English): https://www.economist.com/asia/2019/09/ ... ate-change

Courrier International even made its cover (bravo!): https://www.courrierinternational.com/m ... 1-magazine

couv1531bd.jpg
couv1531bd.jpg (107.03 KB) Viewed 495 times
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News

Eric DUPONT
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 562
Registration: 13/10/07, 23:11
x 22

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Eric DUPONT » 04/03/20, 13:13

there is already the nuclear dictatorship
0 x
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 13:15

Ah ah ah cpafo! : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4341
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 297

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby GuyGadebois » 04/03/20, 13:36

The continuation (I am subscribed):

China, green leader by default

The America of Donald Trump, who decided to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, brings water to this mill. Today, the role of world leader in climate has returned by default to China. The Communist Party began to integrate the fight against climate change into its planning in 1990. Many measures have been taken, including a National Program on Climate Change and a law on renewable energies. As a result, in 2017, China reduced its CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 46% compared to 2005, three years before the date planned to reach this target. And it claims today that by 2030, 20% of its energy will come from non-fossil sources.

The choices that China will make will be crucial to give the world a chance to limit the rise in temperatures to 1,5 ° C. First, the consumption of coal will have to drop drastically: improvements in the methods of producing energy from this fuel are not sufficient. While China is by far the largest producer and user of solar energy in the world, it also remains the largest consumer of coal [and as such is responsible for almost all of the rise in global greenhouse gas emissions. tight]. After two years without opening new coal-fired power plants, the country launched in 2018 the construction of new factories with a capacity of 28 gigawatts. The total capacity of the units under construction, 235 gigawatts, will increase the power of Chinese coal-fired power plants by 25%. As for the power plants planned as part of the “new silk route” project, which aims to strengthen China's prestige abroad by helping several countries build infrastructure, a quarter will be powered by coal. The 136 countries involved in this project are responsible for 28% of global CO2 emissions. According to a study by Tsinghua University, if a decarbonization process is not implemented, this rate will rise to 66% by 2050.

Lies of States


Authoritarian ecology can therefore excel at developing policies, but its results are not necessarily better than those of democratic ecology, when they are not worse. Policies led by bureaucratic and technocratic elites without members of civil society being able to give their opinion, control or modify it (or very little) have certain disadvantages: it suffices to see Chinese provincial governments lying about their use of coal and China's allegedly “clean” hydropower projects on the major rivers of Southeast Asia, which wreak havoc on the flow of water and fish stocks.

At the same time, even India, despite the corruption and chaos it has suffered, manages to achieve certain things. In the past three years, the country has invested more in renewable energy than in fossil fuels, helped by a sharp increase in the tax on coal and a drop in the cost of solar energy (thanks to its more than three hundred days of sunshine a year). According to Indian authorities, the share of energy from non-fossil sources should reach 60% by 2030.

Authoritarian regimes put to the test

India is neither a paragon of democracy nor of ecology. But having non-governmental organizations and citizens' associations who give their opinion on ecology is certainly better than the silence imposed in China. And even reprehensible democracies, like Australia, can make amends: state governments already have ambitious renewable energy targets, and 90% of Australians believe that the federal government's climate policy is not enough .

If governments don't tackle the climate issue, the climate will tackle them. When cyclone Nargis killed 140 people in Burma in 000, the incompetence and the lies of the junta that ruled the country at the time accelerated its downfall [this must have consented to a form of democratic transition, of course very framed]. Likewise, when Chinese Communist leaders face natural disasters, such as the powerful earthquake that struck Sichuan Province a few days after Nargis, they know their legitimacy is at stake. The climate will severely test many states Asian, and especially authoritarian states.
0 x
"It's better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on smart things." (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect"
(Tryphon)
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 14:06

Thank you Guyguy!

Remember to use quotes when you copy / paste something ... I noticed that you rarely did ...
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News

ABC2019
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1068
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 48

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby ABC2019 » 04/03/20, 14:12

Christophe wrote:We mentioned it yesterday with ABC2019 here: pollution-air/oms-la-pollution-de-l-air-7-millions-de-morts-en-2012-t13166-10.html#p382698 . The fact is that we tolerate and accept many more prohibitions and restrictions on our freedoms in the face of a virus than against air pollution or the fight against global warming, which is much more dangerous.....WHY?

Air pollution in China currently kills AT LEAST 25 a month ... It is AT LEAST 000 times more than the coronavirus ... See calculations here: pollution-air/oms-la-pollution-de-l-air-7-millions-de-morts-en-2012-t13166-10.html#p382714

Global warming will claim hundreds of millions of lives in the coming decades!

Yet we fight the corona ... uh the coron ... es! : Mrgreen: WHY?

I do not know if the question is naive or not, but the answer seems obvious to me: it is because pollution and RC are secondary consequences of the combustion of fossils, and that this combustion of fossils brings a standard of life unequaled in history, and therefore considered to be an entirely acceptable price to pay in terms of the benefits they provide - just as car accidents are an acceptable price to pay for the convenience of transport it offers, or obesity and diabetes are considered acceptable compared to the advantage of having a rich and abundant food constantly at hand.
0 x
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 14:25

Cpafo! : Mrgreen:
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News
Paul72
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 135
Registration: 12/02/20, 18:29
x 30

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Paul72 » 04/03/20, 14:41

dictatorships have never brought anything good for societies in history ...

No, the main directions, the projects of society should be debated and decided from now on by all citizens, on the basis of knowledge and not beliefs, and not by governments or institutions which should only be there for possibly organizers or moderators of the debate. Exactly the opposite is happening: decisions are taken by an unrepresentative handful, in defiance of citizens who have only an advisory role (polls), and worse, in defiance of scientific knowledge and syntheses carried out by experts.

Will it end up moving? I honestly don't know ...
1 x
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 17:46

Paul72 wrote:dictatorships have never brought anything good for societies in history ...


I would not be so categorical, if dictatorships always bring human misery, they also often lead to wars ... which are catalysts of technological development ...

Not sure that we went to the Moon without the Nazis, it is even sure that not ... or at least much later ...
Planes may still be propeller today too ...

Hard to say!

And 1 point from Godwin 1 !!

Paul72 wrote:No, the main directions, the projects of society should be debated and decided from now on by all citizens, on the basis of knowledge and not beliefs, and not by governments or institutions which should only be there for possibly organizers or moderators of the debate.
Exactly the opposite is happening: decisions are taken by an unrepresentative handful, in defiance of citizens who have only an advisory role (polls), and worse, in defiance of scientific knowledge and syntheses carried out by experts.

Will it end up moving? I honestly don't know ...


That's it! Currently (and even more since Macron) we are in plutocracy, development by money, the infinite growth of my 2 ...

It is the dictatorship of money: is it not a more or less disguised form of dictatorship?
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News
User avatar
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 51923
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 1104

Re: The dictatorship against pollution and climate change?

Unread Messageby Christophe » 04/03/20, 17:51

Hey it looks like Corona is making people move !!

Can air pollution be described as a "pandemic"?

Marcus Dupont-Besnard - 5 hours ago - Sciences

Researchers have just published a study in which they note that air pollution causes 8,8 million deaths per year, reducing global life expectancy by 3 years on average.

The authors of a study published on March 3, 2020 in Cardiovascular Research (Oxford) did not choose their words at random. While the epidemics linked to Covid-19 raise fears of a possible pandemic, this team of researchers affirm that there is indeed an already existing pandemic, one of the most important in the history of humanity, (and qu 'should not be forgotten in this context): pollution.

These scientists have developed their own atmospheric modeling methodology, called Global Exposure Mortality Model (GEMM). In summary, this model combines all the impacts of pollution identified by other studies, and then incorporates it into the causes and death rates worldwide. The goal: to determine the impact of air pollution on life expectancy in each region and each country. The team's conclusions are quite striking. They immediately bring a high figure: no less than 8,8 million premature deaths are caused each year by air pollution.

AN “AIR POLLUTION PANDEMIC”

The researchers believe their results highlight the existence of a pandemic caused by air pollution. This claim is based on their model integrating pollution among the multiple sources of death. They point out that smoking kills 7,7 million people each year, that the AIDS virus causes 700 deaths a year, and that different forms of violence - like wars - are responsible for more than 000 deaths. Faced with such figures, which are already alarming in themselves, that of the pollution of 500 million premature deaths appears to be just as serious.

“Since the impact of air pollution on public health is wider than expected, and since it is a global phenomenon, we believe that our results show that there is a pandemic of air pollution. 'air' ”, explain the researchers at the conclusion of their study. It would seem, therefore, that they justify this choice of word by the global scale of the phenomenon and its dangerousness, and it turns out that, as was explained moreover a few weeks ago, the difference between epidemic and pandemic rests especially in the magnitude of the number of cases, causing difficult control and, therefore, greater virulence. On the other hand, it will be noted that the use of the word for the effects of air pollution does not meet the concept of "contagiousness", but all definitions of pandemic do not necessarily include this criterion as a sine qua non condition of phenomenon.

LIFE EXPECTANCY IS REDUCED BY 3 YEARS

Asia is, unsurprisingly, the region of the world where the share of mortality due to pollution is the most notable. In India, for example, fine particles are responsible for an 8,5-year reduction in life expectancy when, in China, it is 4,1 years. If Western Europe and the Americas are less affected, life expectancy worldwide is still reduced by 3 years on average. The researchers also deepened various aspects of the impacts of air pollution. For example, it is people over the age of 60 who are most affected by this mortality impact. It is also cardiovascular diseases that cause the most deaths due to pollution.

The researchers indicate in their paper that they have taken care to distinguish anthropogenic sources (of human cause) and natural sources of pollution, in order to identify what can be acted on or not. The way the researchers describe the result of this distinction is sharp: “We show that around two thirds of premature deaths are attributable to atmospheric pollution of human origin, mainly due to the use of fossil fuels; this figure reaches 80% in high-income countries. Five and a half million deaths a year worldwide are potentially preventable. "

The message of their study is to alert public policy makers: air pollution must be integrated with other risk factors, and more particularly those which affect the heart, in the same way as smoking or diabetes. According to these researchers' estimates, and as if they were evoking a cure for a disease, the elimination of emissions from fossil combustion would increase human life expectancy by a year, or even two if all the emissions were stopped.


https://www.numerama.com/sciences/60930 ... demie.html
0 x
Ce forum helped you? Help him too so that he can continue helping others - Publish an article on Econology and Google News




  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 5 guests