Chinanews.com, May 10 (Wen Tianxia) Recently, Greta Tumberg, the Swedish "environmental girl", "fired" on China's carbon emissions and other issues on social media, questioning whether China should be regarded as a development China also said that “China needs to change” in response to the climate crisis.

However, Tong Beili, who took out of context and looked at China with colored glasses, was "slapped in the face" by the speed of light, which once again exposed his double standard and ignorance.

Graphics: China-Singapore Net Zhang Jianyuan

　　The basis for Tunberg’s “mouthing” was a report published by CNN and many other Western media.

The report claims, "In 2019, China's greenhouse gas emissions exceeded all developed countries combined."

　　"Sewage" is splashed quickly, but what is the truth?

According to the report released by US media, China "contributed" more than 27% of the total global carbon emissions, followed by the United States, accounting for about 11%, and India surpassing the European Union for the first time, ranking third, accounting for about 6.6%. The European Union accounts for about 6.4%.

　　But even the same report pointed out that in 2019, China’s per capita carbon emissions were about 10.1 tons, which was lower than the 17.6 tons in the United States, which continued to top the list.

In other words, as a large country with a population of 1.4 billion, China's per capita carbon emissions are still far below that of developed countries.

　　What's more, data shows that China has basically reversed the rapid growth of carbon emissions: in 2019, carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP fell by 18.2% and 48.1% respectively compared with 2015 and 2005, which has exceeded the foreign promised reduction of 40% in 2020. %-45% target; in 2019, non-fossil energy accounted for 15.3% of primary energy consumption, an increase of 7.9 percentage points from 2005, and it has exceeded the target of raising to about 15% in 2020; in 2018, China The forest area and forest stock volume increased 45.09 million hectares and 5.104 billion cubic meters respectively over 2005, becoming the country with the largest increase in global forest resources during the same period.

　　Reinhard Stuller, a climate scientist at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Vienna, pointed out: “Many of the things we (in the West) consume are produced in China, and their emissions are included in China’s carbon emissions record. If you consider To those emissions based on consumption, our record is bad..."

　　This argument is not groundless.

In recent years, it is not uncommon for some developed countries to transfer heavily polluting industries or factories to developing countries, and to "turn the pot" to the local area.

Didn’t the Philippines and many other Asian countries complained many times, saying they wanted to refuse to be a “junkyard” for “foreign trash”?

　　At that time, why didn't Tong Baili, known as the “environmental pioneer,” step up and direct his doubts at Western countries?

　　Moreover, not long ago, after the Japanese government officially decided to discharge the nuclear sewage from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea, many countries around the world strongly opposed it, and there were constant public protests.

But what about Tomberry?

After several days of silence, he reposted the report on his social account. His statement was vague and ambiguous, which is very different from this quick "jump" action against China.

　　Looking back at the past few years, what has this "green girl" touted by the Western media really done for environmental protection?

　　Instead of calling on others to plant trees or to save energy and reduce emissions, as everyone imagined, it encourages students from all over the world to "strike for the climate" together; cross the Atlantic Ocean on a so-called "zero carbon emission yacht" to the United States to participate in a climate conference, but was found on board once. Sexual plastic water bottles, and had to mobilize two crew members to fly to New York to drive the yacht back.

The entire "performance art" produced more carbon emissions than you want to save...what is the point of doing this show?

　　Russian President Vladimir Putin pointedly pointed out, "She (Tumberg) is an ignorant youth who is used by adults... If someone uses children and adolescents for personal gain, they should be condemned. Adults must do their best not to let young people And children are in an extreme situation."

　　Putin also called for: "She will explain to developing countries why they should continue to live in poverty and cannot be like Sweden."

　　Indeed, to remove the "vest" of environmental protection, behind the Tomberrys, it is the Western double-standard routine of "being more lenient in self-discipline and strict in treating others".

　　Blindly brandishing the stick of political correctness from a Western perspective and taking things out of context, wearing "tinted glasses" to point to other countries at will. Such behavior has nothing to do with "environmental protection."

Performing one after another emotional performance, while selectively turning a blind eye to the harsh behavior of Western countries themselves destroying the environment, such a "double standard", no one is convinced.

　　I advise the "environmental girl" who "strayed" to stop inciting class strikes. The most important thing to do now is to return to the classroom and pick up books to make up for their ignorance and narrowness. Otherwise, they will end up as a joke.

(Finish)