this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
80 points (69.2% liked)

World News

33089 readers
586 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (9 children)

This article is nearly two years old. Also, I implicitly distrust any source which depicts Taiwan as part of the PRC.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

The unofficial consensus between the KMT/PRC was that Taiwan and China are one country. The NED-funded DPP has been trying to break that status quo, though.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I am always happy to hear about reforestation, but has somebody understood out of which source the numbers from china are coming? I mean they are sometimes quite the enthusiasts talking about their successes

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The picture shows that Vietnam has more with 56.2%....

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's in absolute area terms jfc

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Just factual content

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would be hesitant in claiming this as a win. I know that Japan has one of the highest number of trees per capita in the g7 but that was a hold over from post WW2. Where they planted a shit ton of a singular tree type. The monoculture wrecks havoc in their ecosystem. All this to say it's good that they are planting trees I'm just hoping they are doing it planning it out carefully.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

A monoculture only wrecks havoc on an ecosystem if a flourishing ecosystem existed there already...

In China, trees are mostly used to block desertification.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

according to (checks notes) ... "visualcapitalist". Yeah that sounds like a totally unbiased and reliable source.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

What the hell is PRK doing!?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder if this includes tree plantations. Those should not be considered forests in my view.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

China even includes shrubbery in their numbers so take that as you will.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Iceland and Uruguay got those numbers tho.

[–] rbesfe 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No sources given for the data used in the infographic. How surprising /s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Yay China. Say... isn't this the same country that turns out 68% of the world's air pollution?

What have they done about that?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. And the same country that produces all the shit we order from them. So is it their pollution or ours?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't this the same country that also produces per capita 1/4th the pollution of USA, and the single country that manufactures almost all of the world's goods, effectively bringing total world's pollution to way less than if many countries were manufacturing?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Also the country that dominates green energy manufacturing... Which is what everyone else is using to reduce their emissions.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

In terms of particulates? China's really cleaned that up in recent years.

But, well, China doesn't have massive piles of natural gas it can burn instead of coal. Coal is notoriously dirty.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] rxbudian 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

sources that contradicts this is buried in the convo
https://lemmy.ml/comment/5738838

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure but what's the forest growth per capita?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

How is that relevant? Serious question, I don’t see a link between forests and per capita that actually matters. If we were talking about economic comparisons, sure. If anything, adjusting it as “per sq mile of forestable land” would make more sense.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›