Comment by yongjik | Hacker News Reader

Comment by yongjik | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> To ask these countries to reduce their energy requirements is to ask their citizens to live a lower standard of life. Hypocritical of those in the West to make that request.

That's a weird take. The West has colonized the rest of the world, enslaved people, exported cheap product to decimate local industry (sometimes at gunpoint), extracted resources (frequently with indigenous people working like slaves), propped up dictators, you name it ...

(I'm not particularly trying to blame the nebulous "West," as many other countries would have done the same if they had the chance. See what Japan did during WW2.)

... but we draw a line at trying to avert a global climate disaster?

Just this year, America was busy making sure China doesn't get the chips they want, by pressuring its own allies into not making more deals with China. And these things are considered completely normal and part of "business as usual" as long as they support the continued hegemony of America.

But talk about fending off the existential threat against the human civilization, and people are like "Oh no! Won't anybody think about those poor Indians who need their gas-powered cars!!"

No. The _ruling elites_ of the western world conquered much of the world over the last 1000 years, including their (current) European subjects.

I refuse to be guilted into thinking I’m somehow a bad man because what someone ultra privileged did, just because of my relative proximity.

You share a larger portion of this percentage of genetic information with some person from centuries ago, who fucking cares. Those people are simply detracting and not helping. I'd just ignore them. The signal to noise ratio of this site has taken a giga nose dive.

> but we draw a line at trying to avert a global climate disaster?

USA isn't going to invade countries to hinder their development. Neither is China. Energy needs continue to increase.

But my point is that the US is hindering China's chip industry development just fine, without a single gunshot fired, and it's considered totally mundane.

There are a lot of ways developed countries can nudge developing ones toward better energy efficiency. Many of them (like, say, funding solar arrays or nuclear plants) would actually benefit these countries. Some of them (say, higher customs tax for products made with fossil fuel energy) may not, but they can be implemented incrementally and paired with other "carrots" like renewable energy projects.

Point taken, but I think we need more than a nudges.

Sure a lot of small 1% improvements can make a change, but we don't know if the curve is linear or exponential.

tbh west does not have much carrots or sticks to nudge - not to mention they'll be nudging towards affordable PRC renewables or nuclear considering poor state of western energy infra export. Really only agent that can nudge is PRC as current dominant infra exporter who did ramped down coal plant funding on BRI which is somewhat sigificant long term. Short medium PRC still going to be building more domestic coal than rest of world combined and there isn't anyone that can pressure PRC to change her energy security considerations under current geopolitical climate. Long term global, post RU sanctions, less developing countries are going to rely on western high tech for something as critical as energy. Emphasis on high tech, like fusion or nuclear or other sufficiently advanced energy solutions developing countries can't hope to replicate or substitute if ever sanctioned/denied. I predict relatively accessible low tech energy generation like fossil fuels and renewables like wind/solar/hydro is going to remain mainstay of energy mix because we are entering world where global south are less likely to depend on west for critical infra. Which is to say they'll be burning a lot more coal for base load power.

How many wrongs do you think will make a right? Shouldn't we strive for a solution that uplifts everyone rather than limiting the aspirations of those who were historically exploited?

It's not about denying climate change or the necessity to act, but it's about finding a path forward that respects the rights of all nations to develop. This entails working towards sustainable, clean energy solutions and aiding developing nations in transitioning to such technologies, rather than simply demanding they cut their emissions. Let's strive for an equitable transition to sustainability rather than rehashing past wrongs as justifications for present impositions.

The only thing that was push towards sustainable energy is when its better per dollar.

> existential threat against the human civilization

That threat will always be there, just need to have awareness of it.

Hopefully its linear a linear curve we're on and not exponential. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis

Reply on news.ycombinator.com