The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is on track to decline slightly from last year's emissions, according to a new analysis published in the journal Nature Climate Change on Monday. The anticipated decrease in CO2 emissions comes even as the world economy is growing, suggesting a turning point in clean energy development—and a long-hoped-for "decoupling" of economic growth and increased carbon emissions.
[...] Decreased coal use in China—whose carbon dioxide emissions account for nearly one-third of global emissions—was largely responsible for the decline in global emissions, the researchers concluded. After a decade of rapid growth, China's emissions rate slowed to 1.2 percent in 2014 and is expected to drop by approximately 3.9 percent in 2015, according to the report. More than half of new energy needs in China were met in 2014 from non-fossil fuel sources, such as hydro, nuclear, wind and solar power.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday December 08 2015, @08:17PM
no country will accept the decreased economic growth
There is a growing body of economic thought that "economic growth" is neither necessary nor desirable, at least in the way we have sought to obtain growth in the past.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-gustave-speth/growth-fetish-five-reason_b_4018166.html [huffingtonpost.com]
http://steadystate.org/discover/downsides-of-economic-growth/ [steadystate.org]
Related, but not exactly the same thing:
We need horizontal growth, not vertical growth. It does the world no good to raise the standard of living in the EU, or the US, while leaving huge segments of the world living in utter poverty and despair. But this is a moral argument, and not really an economic one. Many economists are starting to believe that new industry should be located in poorer countries, rather than yet another factory in China or the US. And not because of lower wages, but precisely because doing so will raise those wages.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.