China's CO2 emissions hit Q1 record high after 4% rise in early 2023 (2023)(carbonbrief.org)
carbonbrief.org
China's CO2 emissions hit Q1 record high after 4% rise in early 2023 (2023)
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-hit-q1-record-high-after-4-rise-in-early-2023/
8 comments
What's the relevance of this today?
Because of this:
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-6079807/v1
Global warming is accelerating, yet we as a human race are doing very little to prevent it. Instead, we keep arguing about how Western countries need to match China’s approach to emissions. I kid you not, that is literally what people on HN are telling me, while China continues increasing its emissions every single year.
Global warming is accelerating, yet we as a human race are doing very little to prevent it. Instead, we keep arguing about how Western countries need to match China’s approach to emissions. I kid you not, that is literally what people on HN are telling me, while China continues increasing its emissions every single year.
"12 May 2023".
China's emissions appear to have been flat in 2024, gone down in 2025. Note, same domain as your own link: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha...
We (humanity) need much more than that, of course, but it doesn't help anyone to use old data.
On the up side, all this is being done for nice boring economic reasons (renewables are cheaper than alternative power sources), which means energy-based emissions are likely to go away automatically all by themselves.
On the down side again, there's lots of emission sources other than energy. Cattle and concrete are big ones (even cement at 3% is still worse than aviation is), but basically everything more than grassland degradation (which is 0.1% of CO2 emissions) needs to be resolved for long-term stability: https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector
Also on the down side, the correct time to have made big leaps here even with just the energy part was "about 5-10 years ago": https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c
China's emissions appear to have been flat in 2024, gone down in 2025. Note, same domain as your own link: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha...
We (humanity) need much more than that, of course, but it doesn't help anyone to use old data.
On the up side, all this is being done for nice boring economic reasons (renewables are cheaper than alternative power sources), which means energy-based emissions are likely to go away automatically all by themselves.
On the down side again, there's lots of emission sources other than energy. Cattle and concrete are big ones (even cement at 3% is still worse than aviation is), but basically everything more than grassland degradation (which is 0.1% of CO2 emissions) needs to be resolved for long-term stability: https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector
Also on the down side, the correct time to have made big leaps here even with just the energy part was "about 5-10 years ago": https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c
The quote from your link:
> China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole
So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is a great progress?
> China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole
So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is a great progress?
> So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is progress?
Yes. Obviously.
Because of why it happened, and because of how it didn't come with a recession this time.
Enough progress? I doubt it. But it is progress, and it's China doing it while still growing their economy, so it's time to end this idea that China's emissions are a reason for anyone else to refuse action.
Yes. Obviously.
Because of why it happened, and because of how it didn't come with a recession this time.
Enough progress? I doubt it. But it is progress, and it's China doing it while still growing their economy, so it's time to end this idea that China's emissions are a reason for anyone else to refuse action.
I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. I think there will be a little upward adjustment from “likely” numbers because of this AI thingy.
https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions
https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions
> I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory.
You sure about that?
With your recent comment history, you've been claiming victory for your rhetorical position without waiting for "official" stats (what makes a stat official?), and deny the stats which do exist as "propaganda".
That is in fact why I noted my newer reference was pointing to the same domain as you were using to claim yours.
As an aside: It's not like this is even a proper environmental victory condition yet, see my other links on that, just that the rate at which CO2 is going up (due to China) is not itself going up. "Victory" happens when atmospheric CO2 goes past 400 ppm again, this time downwards. All that can be said positively about China here is "heading in the right direction", although you seem to have a bee in your bonnet to deny even that.
You sure about that?
With your recent comment history, you've been claiming victory for your rhetorical position without waiting for "official" stats (what makes a stat official?), and deny the stats which do exist as "propaganda".
That is in fact why I noted my newer reference was pointing to the same domain as you were using to claim yours.
As an aside: It's not like this is even a proper environmental victory condition yet, see my other links on that, just that the rate at which CO2 is going up (due to China) is not itself going up. "Victory" happens when atmospheric CO2 goes past 400 ppm again, this time downwards. All that can be said positively about China here is "heading in the right direction", although you seem to have a bee in your bonnet to deny even that.
The only data I trust are from IEA.
And the data they are publishing are not encouraging for the future of the world.
And the data they are publishing are not encouraging for the future of the world.