The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that China’s emissions were down 1.6% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025 and by 1% in the latest 12 months. Electricity supply from new wind, solar and nuclear capacity was enough to cut coal-power output even as demand surged, whereas previous falls were due to weak growth.
The analysis, based on official figures and commercial data, shows that China’s CO2 emissions have now been stable, or falling, for more than a year. However, they remain only 1% below the latest peak, implying that any short-term jump could cause China’s CO2 emissions to rise to a new record.
I’m waiting for the “but at what cost?”
Can’t we just let a positive message stand for what it is? Why do we always need to search for the bad side?
The comment you replied to is in regards to how most news agencies will paint any progress China / Chinese people make as “with a cost” in order to dilute the impact of said progress.
How’re they doing on CFCs and Methane?
Whataboutism
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48353341
https://www.earth.com/news/methane-leaks-surge-amid-record-fossil-fuel-production/
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/what-makes-methane-more-potent-greenhouse-gas-carbon-dioxide
Considering the environmental slant of the article it’s a valid question.
You can also ask „What about the forced labor camps which produce the needed resources?“ it is still whataboutism.
That’s not the definition of whataboutism, nor is it my argument. Please do not strawman.