Why do climate related news attracts crazies from all sides in the comment? India was gonna increase steel capacity anyways, emissions will increase but not as much as it would have otherwise. That is the point. Unless rich countries somehow curb their consumption, you can't ask the same of others.
65
No_Tree_81441 day ago
+31
it's mostly performative that's why. a lot of people in the west are around 1-2 generations removed from when pollution was at an all time high while industrializing/constructing. and on top of that their "absolute" number for emissions is low because of a smaller population so when countries like china or india that have like 50x their population, and subsequently a much higher emissions rate ppl kinda lose all rationality.
they dont care about per capita emissions because "the earth doesn't care about it" which is actually a great argument. but you need to provide a solution as well. you cant just expect these major countries to stop developing, it doesn't work like that.
the only way is if the wealthy countries step in and invest tens, if not 100's of billions of dollars into a lot of these developing countries energy/construction needs. which is obviously never going to happen. so idk what's the point of complaining really
31
BPhiloSkinner1 day ago
+4
>The policy proposes promoting gas-based steelmaking, increasing the use of steel scrap, and offering incentives for continuous emission reduction.
Steel production in India is mostly done with coke - much of it imported.^(1) A concerted move from coke to gas, or electric arc (for scrap steel) will reduce per-plant emissions, but with a plan for doubling steel production, emissions overall will rise- just not as much as would be if India stayed with coke.
They'll need more natural gas, of course, and may be looking ahead to gas from the Mannar Basin field, off the coast of Sri Lanka.
^(1. The Subcontinent has plenty of soft lignite coal, but not much of bituminous coal and anthracite, which are better for coking.)
4
IntelArtiGen1 day ago
-22
(emissions x 0.75 x 2) is not a good news for the climate.
-22
AggravatingJudge70921 day ago
+61
Would you prefer 1 * 2 instead? Or is steel something only white people are allowed to use?
61
IntelArtiGen1 day ago
-31
> Or is steel something only white people are allowed to use?
Am I supposed to explicitly say that it's also not a good news if emissions aren't reduced in other countries of the world? I think it should be obvious. And why do you talk about white people, you think they're doing much better? In many countries they emit more CO2/capita than in India, but it's also true for Middle eastern countries where afaik people aren't white.
What I can tell for India is that if all countries of the world want to emit as much as the richest countries, the summer there will really be unlivable, and that would be an absolutely bad situation for all indians and I really want to prevent this from happening.
-31
AggravatingJudge70921 day ago
+38
Explain to me how reducing emissions by 25% is not good news. Yes, if India stopped producing steel entirely emissions would be slashed by 100% but i think you can see the problem with that? I don't think you would be celebrating if steel mills closed in your country yes?
38
Stalactie1 day ago
+1
[ Removed by Listnook ]
1
ComeOnIWantUsername1 day ago
-45
Oh, we get a butthurt and racism in one sentence, just because someone did math lmao
-45
Wide_Open_Buttcheeks1 day ago
-42
Lmao let me guess, you are from India?
Whats with the inferiority complex?
-42
HoveringMango1 day ago
+45
Because literally every post attracts negative comments/criticism if its China or India. Yesterday some positive news related to nuclear reactors and there were 5-6 comments dragging the country for no reason. It's not inferiority complex, its just people get tired of watching rich countries consume like locusts while criticizing poor countries for trying to develop using the tech that's available.
45
blah_bleh-bleh1 day ago
+21
Imagine if people outside start living like Indian. World will only require half of the resources.
21
navyblusheet1 day ago
+10
This "inferiority complex" fantasy schtick is getting old bro. Come up with something new.
10
Wide_Open_Buttcheeks1 day ago
-7
Awww someone is mad because his country men are so fragile 🤣
-7
lestofante1 day ago
+1
Well depends, is the -25% relative to the current emission (so about -75% relative to your calculation)
1
IntelArtiGen1 day ago
-3
No, for what I've seen, it's -25% on CO2 / ton. It's also why I said that, because the title is ambiguous.
-3
twitterfluechtling1 day ago
-27
Another stupid headline...
Cutting steel emission while increasing capacity would be another way of saying they cut steel exports while increasing capacity. My head directly went to "India plans to massively grow domestic industry, will use a lot of steel domestically".
While the article is about cutting ***carbon*** emissions in steel-production while increasing capacity. An entirely different topic.
-27
razpor1 day ago
+27
So what do you want to do ? Stop making steel?
27
twitterfluechtling1 day ago
-12
No. I just want a headline which makes sense and reflects the content of the article, like e.g. "India cuts carbon emission in steel production" instead of "India cuts steel emission".
-12
Uchiha_Madara_Nipple1 day ago
+12
You cannot modify headlines according to sublistnook rules. It must have the same headline that's used in the webpage.
12
twitterfluechtling1 day ago
I know. That was not targeted at you. Apologies if it read that way. I'm disappointed with Reuters news quality.
Maybe it's also relevant I'm not a native English speaker. Words changing meaning or having similar but slightly different meanings trip me up. In German, the word "emission" is also used e.g. in the stock-market (as "Aktien-Emission", issuance of shares). Seems in formal English it is also used in the financial context.
Etymologically, emission stems from Latin, to "send out", "send away", which matches my understanding from "Aktien-Emission", but also the more common "CO2 emission", "light emission", "heat emission", etc. So, TIL I learned it is NOT used that way in English.
Either way, the Reuters headline talking about "steel emission", is wrong, even if my interpretation was not obvious to native English speakers.
0
lestofante1 day ago
+13
I understand the headline correctly and never though of your interpretation.
Did you confuse emission and export?
Emission is clearly to do with climate, but I'm not a native speaker
13
Wurschd1 day ago
-17
Are they now emitting steel into the environment or what? :)
-17
[deleted]1 day ago
-6
[removed]
-6
PhysixGuy20251 day ago
+11
This is racism.
11
Seafaringhorsemeat1 day ago
-4
If you’ve ever owned product lines in Asia for a major US shoe manufacturer… and physically inspected suppliers, you’ll know this is a picture, not an opinion.
26 Comments