Discussion
A few years back China was starting one coal plant per week.
They're into Thorium now
They have solar, nuclear, fossils, they just want more energy. One of the bigger contributor to their successes.
Yep
Really?
Prove it.
And I mean prove it.
What, read every meter in China? I’ll get right on that!🤣
Yes.
I think the point I'm making is find original source material.
You imagine Russia talking authoritatively about American capitalism, or China discussing aboriginal culture.
How often has a third party understood anything without original source material.
Unless you find the source you are accepting other peoples biased views.
I have a different view having much involvement in China, but I am also bias, so prefer not to give you my knowledge or opinions.
Naturally we are all biased, and appreciate and agree with you on being biased by others. Is your Our World In Data (original post) coming from meter reads in China?
If you're discussing the source of power and not the amount of power, then meter readings are the wrong metric.
If you want to know what is generating the power you can use government statistics, but just as the west is biased against the east, so the east has its own positive bias.
I can't tell you anything, but I know I don't know.
Because I know I don't know, I know that people with less experience of China know less, which means they definitely don't know.
If you're interested in understanding my bias and my dissapointment with the western portrayal of it, I wrote an article here:
https://habla.news/u/mhardcastle@nostrplebs.com/1738253222927
Thanks I’ll have a read, but I was referring to your original post in terms of amount of TWh generated *and* the breakdown of the sources of the electricity generated was predominantly coal per the graph, so if you want original sources of how much and from what, it’s difficult to be more exact than the meter reads.
Forming knowledge is a dubious endeavour, as even direct observation can be biased, but we do our best.
After I read your based biased article on bias I’ll respond again with my own bias; looking forward to it.👍🏻
I just read your article and thank you for sharing. I believe we will have much to talk about should we ever meet, particularly with your family’s evolution over the past 50 years. If I ever have time to watch the linked videos in your article I’ll come back to them.
One thing to get out of the way is my comments were not implying China is “evil” or “bad”. It’s a country, a government, a national identity, many other things, and that they use a lot of electricity, good on China. Painting an entire group of people as ‘evil’ is a pretty big paintbrush, and begs for trouble.
As for bias and sourcing data, my comment still stands: unless you source the actual data yourself, you rely on intermediary interpretation and bias, forcing you to trust or stay silent. Even meter reading requires testing meters or trusting that they read accurately.
“I know that I know nothing,” but to acknowledge this and still remain silent for all one’s life is the bigger loss for humankind.
I look forward to meeting you too 🫂
most westerners have never seen china or india level air pollution
I'll take clean air as an imperative.
Define clean air?
Outside of the widely accepted Particulate Matter measures...
Come to a place with cleanest air on the measurement scale & then go to Los Angeles.
You'll feel it & see it immediately.
Then go to India, China the worst offenders.
You'll buy a mask just to breathe better, which I did when I was there voluntarily - pre covid.
You didn't define it, you just said it is widely defined.
That's fine, but I prefer to understand.
You don't need to define it for me, but try to define it for yourself. I mean really define it.
I have no insights to give, only that really understanding something is different to believing other people really understand something.
I'm not going to delve into PM measurement techniques - you can do that on your own - but they are good techniques not some fiat imaginative propaganda vehicle like just measuring CO2 as a catchall.
I find a lot of Bitcoiners can't use their intuition - rather they need the scientific breakdowns - that's fine as well just dyor.
It's the same Blindspot as with Bitcoiner / saifedean takes on EVs - they don't take into account the benefit to clean air of not burning the fuel inside the metropolis.
You still didn't define it.
Reading comprehension is hard for you it seems.
I came for a conversation on electric generation tradeoffs with the methods used in China compared to other places on this earth.
I see here you're just forcing yourself into a place where you either haven't been to any of these places - or you're satisfied with not doing your own research to answer your own question.
For me, you resorting to insults means I have already won.
I prefer not to win because the other party gave up. I would prefer to loose to the other person because they have more or better knowledge than me.
I also don't mind winning because I know more than the other person.
But this is failure for us both.
This is the factory my family founded BTW:
There is no insult just fact, I wrote to you in the first sentence I will not do your research for you.
Do better, stop being soft ; no one insulted you.
We have outsourced our carbon footprint to China.... And are now meeting the required UN targets 👍
Carbon footprint, you mean like humans?
We are carbon and we make footprints.
Or do you mean CO2, the stuff plants need to live?
Please explain what a carbon footprint is?
