Science, Innovation, Politics
There seems to be an attempt to define what amount of CO2 should be allocated to a person and by extension a country. It would seem that countries with stable population would be at a disa population which would allocate more CO2 to those population that stabilized their populations
Yup! And do you think they are decarbonising anytime soon?
I think we're going to get one helluva die-off, long before we reach this "forecast".
I'm not sure what "the future belongs to" means. According to the graph, the present seems to be well-represented by Asia. As long as Asia depends on exports to increase domestic standard of living, they are limited by the wealth of their trading partners. If, for instance, you believe that America will go into decline - an old story - then just who will buy those Chinese products? China is building its foundation on American debt - good luck with that.
That is why there was no Copenhagen deal. American voters had no wish to sign if the Indians and Chinese didn't. As both India and China are currently dependant on Anglo American investment bankers, that was never going to happen.Even carbon trading was temporarily cast aside for thr real prize, globalisation.Environmental NGO's are too busy poking their snouts into global warming swill to worry about the damage that will cause. Clean factories will become very dirty factories. NGO supporters aren't capable of thinking for themselves, neither apparantly are the anti globalisation campaigners who's leaders (Monbiot and Klein) have also taken the AGW money.Every day billions go to work without worrying about the consequences of their actions, but even Monbiot has now slithered away from the front line of global warming deception.
The future may well belong to Asia and Africa, but that population graph doesn't seem like a good graph to demonstrate that it will. If sheer numerical superiority was the key then history would already have belonged to Asia and it didn't exactly work that way.It is almost inevitable (and in my opinion a good thing) that the outsized power and influence of North America and Europe will decline in a relative sense as the wealth and power of other nations gradually catches up.However expect America and Europe to be very influential for a while yet. It will take a long time for the wealth of many developing nations to reach the per capita levels of the US and the richer European Nations. The factors that allow Denmark (pop 5 million) to have an economy the size of Bangladesh (150 million) may be in decline but they haven't disappeared.Take the US and India. If the US grows it's real GDP (PPP) by 2% per year and India grows it at 5% per year it is still 50 years for India's economy to outgrow the US economy (in absolute size). Even if India could grow at a prodiguous 8% per year (without interruption) it would take 25 years to catch up.The GDP per capita (very roughly reflecting individual wealth) in India at that point would still be far below US levels.