Well there you have your debate straight up . One world and all why wouldn't you keep your highest emissions under your strictest control ?
Its been offshored for years as perhaps like you . I dont live there .
Where labour is cheapest and in abundance there is nowhere to put the shit that comes out .
Its not simply just saying no i dont live there if you want get on a global scale and get the right effect .
Oh but they are poor nation and dont have the means to do it ?
So we give them the right to pollute !
With more people and far more consumption as they rise out of poverty so to speak and you drive our own market down that has far more established control already ?
Like its nuts to think if its out of site its out of mind then virtue signal look at us we did this kind of thing at the highest costs .
Then try and say its ok third world there is more of you at a cheaper price you can open your polluting industry !
Dont you think you will be voted down for not giving money instead of the renewable sources.
They closed down plastic recycling in south Australia because of renewable energy prices .
As far as i know alot of it just gets dumped at sea out of mind and all .
Yet advanced countries with all sorts of stuff burn the shit as there is no place to put it and can understand there is no space for garbage .
Its renewable put the shit in a high temperature incinerator and get another life out of it .
But it wont come from closed to debate saying hey the science is settled when we know it never is already .
And it certainly wont come from virtue signalling to the third world as they simply dont have the space or systems to deal with shit .
Would be a good start though if your thinking world pollution that no one gets any money unless they have garbage and sewage under control first .
You are not going just dump all the renewable energy waste upon the third world again are you?
