to boycott products made in China and India?

[Lowkeyloopy]

So angry that they have watered down an agreement aimed at saving the planet that my (shortly to be born) child will be living in.

Yes people will say it’s unfair that the more developed economies have enjoyed all the benefits of burning fossil fuels and are now dictating that other countries should stop. Well, tough. We are where we are and the world is on fire.

I’m also sick and tired of people saying that individuals can’t make a difference, AND of the government congratulating itself on bringing down our own carbon emissions. We don’t MAKE anything in this country - we ship it in from other countries. If we all stopped buying crap we don’t need that is manufactured on the cheap in those countries, we could actually help ensure those countries cut their carbon emissions and genuinely bring down our own individual carbon footprints.

So I guess I’m angry at China and India for watering down the COP agreement, but I’m angry at us for creating the circumstances that facilitates the attitude that made them do that.

So, I’ll now be even more consciously checking where my products are from and will not be buying anything made in China or India.

Who’s with me? (YANBU)

Who’s not? And why, out of interest? (YABU)

Happy Sunday all…!

Also UK was the first country to industrialise so out of all countries it is the probably most responsible for the state of global warming.

? But the CO2 emitted by the U.K. at the start of the industrial revolution was 1/3600th of the CO2 being emitted each year today..... I don’t see how that means “uk is the most responsible for the state of global warming”

And don’t forget that CO2 is only one of the greenhouse gases contributing to global warming....
ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

It pretty clear who the most responsible parties are, and it’s not the U.K.

@Mybalconyiscracking

Yeah, sod all those Indian and Chinese bastards that make a living and feed their kids by making the things that we buy.

U.K. is smaller market than their own country....they’re buying more of those products themselves than they are exporting to the U.K.

Also it is a far far richer country than China per person so of course its population is better equipped to bear the brunt of climate change.

Not so sure that money can save you from climate change. It’s more about the luck of geography. The U.K. is a small densely populated group of islands already being gravely affected by rising sea levels. China is a massive country covering a good 1/3rd of the largest continent on the planet, with much lower population density and so moving populations away from the coastline is much more feasible.

U.K. is smaller market than their own country....they’re buying more of those products themselves than they are exporting to the U.K.

Do you seriously think that those countries export goods only to the UK??

If you look at who to blame for climate change per person (you need to scroll down a bit on the article linked), it's definitely not India or China. More the US/Canada and Europe. This analysis works out on per person basis who are the greatest carbon emitters per person from 1850 onwards. UK comes around 8th and China and India are not even in the top 20. However what China and India do now is hugely important as they have the largest populations so they do now need to take action otherwise it will be disastrous. But people in the UK can't point the finger at China and India. Per person, UK has contributed far, far more to global warming than China and India has. I find it interesting but a bit perverse and nonsensical that people in the UK/US are blaming China and India for global warming. In reality it makes much more sense for people in China/India to blame the UK/US /Europe that they now have to jeopardise the living standards of their much poorer populations because the rich countries never bothered to tackle global warming.
www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-historically-responsible-for-climate-change

@PlanDeRaccordement - your link shows that per person/capita India produces far less greenhouse gases than the UK. And also China produces far less greenhouse cases per person than Ireland and US.

ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

There was a TV documentary here (not the UK) recently where a couple agreed to have everything made in China removed from their home. They were left with the kitchen sink and some food.

@Tealightsandd That's a really badly written article, and underlines the generally appalling reporting on climate change and the actions we need to take.

If 1% are responsible for 15% of emissions, and 30x more than the poorest 50%, as stated in the article, that means the remaining 49% of us are responsible for 84% of emissions.

China’s one child policy prevented the birth of 300 million people, so they have already reduced their annual carbon footprint by over 150 million tonnes of CO2.
Instead of playing blame games, or debating whether China is worse than India or the US, we should be working together to reduce emissions. Perhaps rich western countries could fund projects in India to replace coal fired power stations with solar arrays, for example. Companies who outsource their factories to China could stipulate that they must be powered by green energy, etc.
As individual consumers in the UK we can only make a minimal and very token impact, but we should still try.
I have just ordered my Xmas tree from a company that plants ten tropical hardwood trees in Mozambique and Madagascar for every tree bought, manages their fir plantations in the UK as carbon sinks, and avoids people buying plastic trees that will never biodegrade. I am not buying any plastic novelty tat as stocking fillers, and am instead getting charity gifts, such as mosquito nets and farming tools for Africa.
We can all be more mindful about unnecessary purchases, turn our heating off on milder days, turn it down a few degrees in winter, walk to the local shops instead of driving, and so on.
And we can all limit our families to one or two children, so the already struggling planet does not have to cope with even worse population pressure in the next generation.

Sorry that should read 1500 million tonnes!

@PlanDeRaccordement emissions are measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent and include all greenhouse gases not just carbon dioxide.

Here you go OP - this should help with the phone and other things

chinanever.com/categories/phones-not-made-in-china

@jackstini while there may be good reasons to favour South Korea over China, emissions isn't one of them. South Korea's per capita emissions are double that of China's.

[quote Daftasabroom]@jackstini while there may be good reasons to favour South Korea over China, emissions isn't one of them. South Korea's per capita emissions are double that of China's.[/quote]
Just to confirm I'm not recommending anything, just wanted to let the OP know this website existed
She will likely want to know that info though based on her posts so thank you 😊

Its all very well engaging in posturing but its rank hypocrisy for the countries who created this problem and continue to be the world's biggest polluters to point the finger at countries which are still developing.

As pointed out upthread, a child born in the developed world consumes bastly more than one born in the developing world. Our pet dogs consume more than children born in some parts of developing world. We cut overseas aid which funded women's education and reproductive health in poorer countries.

But yes its so much easier to point the finger at the still developing countries than really take responsibility for our own actions.

@Tealightsandd I had a feeling that the Oxfam numbers were easily misinterpreted so did a few checks.

A single person in the UK on the NLW is in the top 5.1% of global rich. A couple on UK average wage with 2 dependant children are at 3%. A joint income of £120k with 2 dependants would be comfortably in the top 1%. Even universal credit would someone in the 30%

Global supply chains being what they are, you're never going to eliminate every dubious source of components unless you bought a smallholding and went full on for the Good Life. Even if you could it wouldn't change the policy. However, despite some of the defeatist comments, that's not a reason not to do what you can. In short, we just need to consume less all around.

A smartphone is essential for modern life and even if the phone itself was made in South Korea or Japan, many components will be Chinese. But even though it isn't something you can do away with entirely, there is scope for reducing the impact by using your phone for as long as possible and repairing rather than replacing when it goes wrong. Only once it is irreparable do you replace it. Even better, if you buy reconditioned gadgets, the manufacturing emissions have already been 'paid off' by the previous owner so the impact of your purchase is limited to whatever repairs were done in between.

Clothing-wise, buy better quality so that it will last. Even better, buy second hand from a charity shop.

Most of the top 100 polluting companies are oil giants. If you attribute pollution to the end user, every time you fill your petrol tank (or take a delivery from a diesel van) you bear responsibility for all that methane leaked from oil fields or flared off. So find alternatives to car transport. Even electric cars aren't ideal so a bike is preferable.

It's hard to boycott Chinese products because they are so insidious, their components are everywhere. I do try to avoid them where possible though and certainly never order food from a Chinese takeaway or deal with businesses owned by people of Chinese origin.

@HarrietsChariot
certainly never order food from a Chinese takeaway or deal with businesses owned by people of Chinese origin.

Er why would that be? I understand buy local to reduce carbon footprint, but excluding local sources because they’re Chinese....why? What’s the reason?

But burning coal in India is bad for india too. I have families in India. Indian cities are the most polluted in the world. People are breathing toxic air.
Also the logic of per capita emissions is poor one. US definitely needs to lower its consumption significantly but a country like China is also responsible for overall emissions they are causing.

[quote Daftasabroom]@PlanDeRaccordement emissions are measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent and include all greenhouse gases not just carbon dioxide.[/quote]
They weren’t by the sources I was posting. They were separated out. So I felt it was more accurate to mention that than have people assume wrong that the CO2 cumulative tonnes I was posting included gasses other than CO2.

[quote Appleandoranges]@PlanDeRaccordement - your link shows that per person/capita India produces far less greenhouse gases than the UK. And also China produces far less greenhouse cases per person than Ireland and US.

ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions[/quote]
Yes, exactly that. Your initial post implied that U.K. emissions were more than double those of China, which is incorrect. Perhaps you meant to say US?

@gofg

U.K. is smaller market than their own country....they’re buying more of those products themselves than they are exporting to the U.K.

Do you seriously think that those countries export goods only to the UK??

Er no? My posts implies nothing of the sort. Of course they export elsewhere too. My point is that their domestic market is bigger than the UK export market.

@Appleandoranges
Per person, UK has contributed far, far more to global warming than China and India has.

I think you misread the table in your source,
www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-historically-responsible-for-climate-change

The table on the left is cumulative carbon emissions from 1850-2021 divided only by 2021 population which doesn’t show the actual per person contribution from 1850-2021. It’s to show how meaningless a simple per capita cumulative calculation is because countries didn’t have the exact same population from 1850 to 2021.

The table on the right shows the true per person contribution by country as it divides each year’s carbon emissions by that year’s population from 1850-2021 and then takes an average. As you can see, UK, India and China are not in the top 20. It doesn’t go below that.

But the point of the table is that the top 20 countries with the highest per person contribution to cumulative carbon emissions from 1850-2021 are:

1. New Zealand
2. Canada
3. Australia
4. United States
5. Argentina
6. Qatar
7. Gabon
8. Malaysia
9. Republic of Congo

10. Nicaragua 11. Paraguay 12. Kazakhstan 13. Zambia 14. Panama 15. Cote d’Ivoire 16. Costa Rica 17. Bolivia 18. Kuwait 19. Trinidad and Tobago 20. United Arab Emirates

So it’s not really a case of “rich” countries vs “poor” countries. It’s a case of everyone’s caused this and we need everyone to be part of the solution.

Its all very well engaging in posturing but its rank hypocrisy for the countries who created this problem and continue to be the world's biggest polluters to point the finger at countries which are still developing.

Let’s be frank. The only country that consistently is on every list no matter how you calculate- total current emissions, per capita current emissions, total cumulative emissions since 1750, per person emissions 1850-2021- is the USA 🇺🇸

Hands down the US always was and still is the elephant in the room.