G20, and its problems.

It makes you laugh when you read the "controversies" on the G20, especially those brought forward by the adult Greta, who, despite being an adult, poses as a girl (one wonders how long the trick will be able to do it), and the blindness of the newspapers on the inevitable evolution of the problem.

To understand why the G20 did not decide anything, here is an interesting diagram taken from Our World in Data:

As you can see, the West is no longer the biggest suspect, nor the biggest culprit, in CO2 emissions. Even if we wanted to consider Japan "western", the red part has surpassed both the green and the yellow parts and all the others.

What does it mean? It means that at the end of the day the fate of the planet is in the hands of China and India, a little bit of Japan. Why? Because even if the USA and the EU reduced CO2 emissions to zero, and I mean zero (it means we don't even breathe), the world would still face warming, because the red part is sufficient to support the phenomenon.

The West must stop self-flagellating: we are not (anymore) the problem.

And if we count the absentees we notice one thing: that among the absent (China, India, Russia) there are dirty consciences: even Russia, where the situation does not seem serious, is quite strange if we think that it has only 150 million. of inhabitants, against EU-28 (also contains UK) which has 447 million inhabitants.

Now, however, let us ask ourselves: why has China decided to remain in the background instead of presenting itself in a leadership situation? The reason is simple: they know what we are about to do.

Let's also assume that neutrality is reached in 2030. And that, as emissions increase, the "red" part of the diagram (ie ASIA) increases emissions as they are doing. (so much the western fools will undertake to reduce). What happens next?

It happens, and not even "after" that suddenly a flurry of new ecological "certifications" starts. It is a theme that is already emerging, and that is already impacting on trade. In the past, the way Europeans had to defend themselves against the wave of low-cost Chinese products was to request certifications (CE, TÜV, etc.) in order to be able to sell the products. It is still the major system in use to keep Chinese and Indian cars out of the European market, so to speak.

This thing of quality certifications on ever higher standards has always been the thorn in the side of the nations that aspire to become large exporters of finished products, because the EU always ended up "closing" the borders not so much by doing protectionism , but raising the required certification levels. This obviously requires industrial transformation in Europe (after all, Chinese toxic paints were common in toys here as well, 30 years ago), but it works great as a customs barrier.

The reason why the Chinese no longer want to give weight to agreements like the G20, as well as the Indians and Russians, is that they are seeing a whole series of European certifications, so-called "green" certifications.

And they see that these certifications, like the whole ISO-14000 family, https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html are starting to take hold. And they know very well what will happen: it will happen that sooner or later they will become so mandatory that they will also be required for companies (whether Chinese or Indian), and precisely the companies that export.

And if you were hoping to just certify companies, TÜV certifications for products are also being born: https://www.tuv.com/world/en/green-product-mark.html

In practice, the Chinese know that "green" agreements, when applied, produce certifications, which then become obstacles to trade in richer markets. And they know that by giving strength to these agreements, they would give strength to these certifications, which will soon become mandatory, as soon as there are more stringent ones that will remain optional.

Sooner or later, in short, the certificate of "product built in a zero-emission country" will come out. And sooner or later it will become mandatory.

In short, China and India cannot strengthen a system that inevitably builds a barrier to trade.

And the problem is even worse if you think about how many certifications can arise between "the state of today" and "the state of 2030". I'm talking about "product built entirely with energy from renewable sources" or "product built without fossil energy", I'm talking about "repairable product". "disposable product", etc. ( https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/it/qanda_19_5889 ) which will enter into force from 2022. ( https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-efficiency/energy- label-and-ecodesign / regulation-laying-down-ecodesign-requirements-1-october-2019_en? redir = 1 )

Compounding the problem is that when these directives are passed, states are allowed to help their industry. For example: https://repair.eu/news/germany-and-austria-implement-repair-bonuses/ , germany and austria are about to subsidize artisans and industries that refurbish electronic machines.

This is the problem of China, India and Russia: which soon, given their CO2 production, could literally be unable to export to the EU.

China, like India or Russia, will NEVER participate in a series of international actions whose inevitable result will be to build a wall against their exports.

Still, the wall is already growing.