Did we fuck up when we exported Fritz Haber's >Born 9 December 1868

Did we frick up when we exported Fritz Haber's >Born 9 December 1868
>Breslau, Province of Silesia, Kingdom of >Prussia[1]
>Died 29 January 1934 (aged 65)
>Basel, Switzerland
Haber–Bosch process
>Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 191
to the global south? 20th century CO2 emissions would have been much lower if the global south starved to death and therefore didn't use fossil fuels

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    yes

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >20th century CO2 emissions would have been much lower
    The Global "North" would still burn CO2 like crazy. Shifting the problems to the"souyh" is a pathetic cope.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      the global north is more important and of hire value

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Still missing the issue The Co2 issue would still occur to the sane degree. Pushing the blame on others doesnt serve a purpose. Even the whole "value" thing is pointless because both operate in a global economy tied to the hip of each other.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          there would be a significant reduction in CO2 if there were no global southerners

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >there would be a significant reduction in CO2
            Lmao

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            the global south is 85% of the world's population

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yet produce way less that the North. Netherlands meat farming industry basically consists of shipping in onions and other feed from abroad

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            india and china are putting out a ton of CO2

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because the West offshore it's heavy polluting many. Indias per capita amount is low, China's is in line Czech, Haoan and Singapore.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            yeah, and thats 2 billion people. so saying there would be zero difference is a lie. there would be less CO2 and everyone on the planet would have a better life

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >there would be less CO2
            Pollution g habits would stay the same in the North and you'd have north conduners+companies buying shit like palm oil and cocoa beans from other oarts if the world (and the pollution associated with it).

            >everyone on the planet would have a better life
            The north would get fricked harder by the lack of the Haber process more and would lose "self-sufficiency"

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The north would get fricked harder by the lack of the Haber process more and would lose "self-sufficiency"
            no, the north keeps the process, we just don't give it to the south

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >we just don't give it to the south
            Would be impossible to do. You'd have to totally either quash it in the North or it would spread out oretty quickly due to exchange if knowledge and trade. A lot of things the "North" enjoy relies on the Haber process both inside and outside its supposed realms or colonies during the colonial years

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            just don't give it to the colonies. It isn't like the british didn't take all the food from india anyway, which was based

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >just don't give it to the colonies.
            Good luck moron. Telling for profit companies and settlers to farm like a serf would not fair well. Especially when other sources of fertilizer could not meet up with demand. The access to ammonia fertlizers and immense state support is the reason why many settler farmers were able to compete.

            >It isn't like the british didn't take all the food from india anyway, which was based
            Britain also had its own native farming sector in the UK.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            so don't share the tech with the colonies and import the fertilizer

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Reread the post you replied to. Self-sabotaging your own economy to own the southwest makes no sense.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            giving the global south the haber process turned out disastrous for the whole world

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            It hasn't. It just made them be able to perform better in agriculture and favours both the north and south. Not everything is a zero-sum game.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            it literally caused global warming and for frick tons of global southerners to flood the global north and ruin it

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >it literally caused global warming
            Not really. Emission causes are way more complex then that and in terms if actual output the Birth several vastly outputs more because of earlier industrialization.

            >for frick tons of global southerners to flood the global north and ruin it
            They were moving around before that and you can't really blame them yet totally ignoring the whole time their economies were basically owned by distant empires part.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            so if we had less southerners they would put out less CO2 and we would have less CO2 over all and less global warming
            I can blame them because they are shitting up good countries

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >so if we had less southerners they would put out less CO2
            It would be the sane because the demand of resources and goods from the south would remain. It's like saying the 270lb morbidky obese man with the eating disorder would eat less if you replaced all his slop with low fat yogurt. All he'd do is just eat more to satiate his hunger+depression and/or find ways to deep-fry it and contain 50g of sugar

            >we would have less CO2 over all and less global warming
            You'd have all the exact same polluting industries and factories dumping waste into rivers.

            >I can blame them because they are shitting up good countries
            The good countries are still pretty good.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            CO2 goes up with number of people. fewer global southerners means less CO2 emissions. The world would literally be in better shape if the global south had no food and no way of getting to the north

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >CO2 goes up with number of people.
            morons only think that. That onky "works" if everyone used the same CO2 on the state and individual level. Yet CO2 levels on a state and individual level in the
            "North" mostly eclipses the "south".

            >The world would literally be in better shape if the global south had no food and no way of getting to the north
            Lmao. So you wish there was no colonialism or that global trade was killed off?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            you are a fricking moron if you think the CO2 levels would be the same with or without the global south. so you think all the africans, chinese and south americans produce literally ZERO emissions

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >you are a fricking moron if you think the CO2 levels would be the same with or without the global south
            Northwest would still pollute the same. You think sone fatass driving a a massive pickup truck from his suburb to work and back will still waste less because there's a bit less Paraguayans or Indonesians around?

            >so you think all the africans, chinese and south americans produce literally ZERO emissions
            They priduce less than you think. You just want to have more leeway to consume more resources. The equivalent of those people who use liposuction as a way to remove their fat before enforcing themselves.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            then the total CO2 would be less because all the southerners wouldn't be there to put out any CO2. you are literally moronic

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >then the total CO2 would be less because all the southerners wouldn't be there to put out any CO2
            Emissions aren't only from Co2 (methane exists) or from the mere act of civilians merely living their daily lives. Also those forests being cut downs on colonial plantations would still exist. Malaysia has been providing a large chunk of the world's Palm Oil since the 1920s. If we had less Malaysians we'd still have the same amount of fricking tree cutting and soil depletion or fertilizer use, If we had less Brazilians you'd still have the Dutch mass importing onions from the US+Brazil to feed their cattle.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            there would be less cows and way less deforestation in brazil if there were no brazilians to eat and graze the cows

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >there would be less cows and way less deforestation in brazil if there were no brazilians to eat and graze the cows
            moron. Brazil is an agricultural export power. All those onions and beef are shipped to buyers in the West. Demand for śoy and cattle would remain exactly the same

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >no one in brazil eats
            >no nonwhite is responsible for a single drop of CO2 because none of them ever eat or use heat or anything
            you are a fricking moron

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            They eat, but a frickton of the demand of onions+cattle is for Western demand of Brazilian agricultural products.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nta, but what's the reason behind that?
            Don't give the technology to "thirdies" so they don't outproduce you, so your country can produce that which you import anyway? What even is the economic reasoning behind that?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            less CO2, no mass migration of "economic ""refugees"""

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If he hadn't done it someone else would have
    If Germany had to foresight and moral courage to go all in on gas earfare the world might be better though

Comments are closed.