China’s carbon dioxide emissions shrank by 1% year-on-year in the second quarter of 2026, driven by a 9% decrease in oil consumption as consumers chose cleaner and cheaper ways to get around, according ​to a Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) analysis for Carbon Brief.

  • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    19 days ago

    consumers chose

    🤔

    Sure there are consumers in China, but is that really what effected the change?

    Also from the article:

    researchers saying a structural shift towards electrification and cleaner transport was creating the conditions for emissions’ sustained decline.

    Keyword “structural”. I.e. the government (at least in this case).

    But that is not meant as an excuse for “tHe wEsT”. We can learn a few good things from China without becoming totalitarian!

    • Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      19 days ago

      The government is making changes that allows for consumers to go electric easier. This is what happens when you have an actual functioning government.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      How is China “totalitarian?” Their people report some of the highest satisfaction with their democracy in the world:

      This is not to say that China is perfect. Xi Jinping himself stressed the importance of continuously improving “Whole Process People’s Democracy” explicitly and repeatedly. However, the idea that China is “totalitarian” isn’t really accurate, and this is reflected by the continuous pro-social policies implemented in China. Just take a look at how the bottom 50% of China have consistently been valued and uplifted:

      While the CPC controls the state, the CPC is subservient to the entirety of the working class in China. There is no other way to reconcile the continuous improvements to the lives of the people of China, no other way to explain such a phenomenon. If such a country of 1.4 billion people merely relied on the benevolence of totalitarians, it would have long ago lost the support of the people. Instead, China’s democratic institutions work in a fundamentally different way from western expectations.

      This doesn’t mean they do not exist, rather, it means that it can be more difficult to understand the complexity of Chinese democracy purely based on western understandings of democracy that place high emphasis on representatives and pluralism rather than cohesion and policy driven from the bottom-up. Policy in China comes from below, and is interpreted through a Marxist-Leninist understanding at the top. This unity of bottom-up and top-down policy making is the heart of Chinese democracy, and has roots in the Marxist traditions of the mass line theory and democratic centralism.

      All in all, I think the shifting understanding of China among the west demands a more thorough investigation into the how and why of the Chinese system. Such an investigation requires that we put ourselves in their shoes, rather than project western ideas onto them and see how they do or do not measure up. Otherwise, it is inevitable that such an investigation will miss the essense of the Chinese system, of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.

    • Jhex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 days ago

      both can be true… for decades Quebec has had cleaner and cheaper electricity generation, this structural strategy led many consumers to choose to electrify instead of burning more fossil fuels

      similarly, the decision by the gov to bill water on a fixed base (not metered consumption) resulted in so many more people choosing to have pools and hot tubs

      • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        both can be true…

        Sure, but there is a causality in what you write:

        for decades Quebec has had cleaner and cheaper electricity generation, first structural strategy then led many consumers to choose to electrify instead of burning more fossil fuels

        Unless that’s not how you meant it.

        • Jhex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          19 days ago

          Yes, there is ALWAYS causality. But your initial post made it sound like there is no choice involved here

          Every gov does this, they set some incentives in hopes to sway people one way or the other… this is no different than EV incentives for people to choose EVs for their next car purchase