And the IEA, for its part, expects China to continue to be the sole meaningful over-achiever. It recently revised upwards by 728 GW its forecast for total global renewables capacity additions in the period 2023–27. China’s share of this upward revision? Almost 90 percent. While China surges ahead, the rest of the world remains stuck.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I mean, does it count to be ‘stuck’ if you simply aren’t trying?

    Because that’s what it seems like the rest of the world is doing. They aren’t even trying. Not even a little. Just more technocratic discussions on what trying might look like.

    • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      “Trying” isn’t really a thing on a national scale. What countries do and how they react just depends on their economic system / mode of production.

      Capitalist countries, on account of being capitalist, can never really tackle climate change. China’s the only major country taking this seriously because a socialist nation doesn’t need the profit motive that’s required under capitalism.

      As with most things, the answer is revolution.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    Capitalism solves nothing. It doesn’t even, in general, make people rich. It just makes rich people richer.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Are there any examples of large companies, especially stock corporations, that have voluntarily given up short-term profits in favor of long-term calculation or sustainable management? Or examples of cooperation between competitors outside of common (short-term) profit interests? I am only aware of “sustainability campaigns” that have been staged mainly for publicity purposes, which in the vast majority of cases are nothing more than a drop in the ocean.

    As far as I know, it has always been necessary to use legal regulations to force the companies to pay even the slightest attention to the common good. One example of this is the ban on CFCs to protect the ozone layer - and that took more than a decade (from 1987 until 1999).

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    …as long as it isn’t profitable to solve climate change. And that’s pretty much it. Capitalism is going to be the band playing on the sinking Titanic, except it’s actively drilling more holes in the bottom of the ship.