The funny part is that despite the fact that the west outsources a bunch of its production to China, per capita emissions in China are still lower than most western countries.
I'm not really sure how I feel about hydroelectric being classified as renewable. On one hand it doesn't emit but when you look at projects like the James Bay plant, it's hard to ignore the massive amount of emissions that went into creating the infrastructure and the permanent impact on the landscape.
I'd suppose this is kind of off-topic and is more of a question of how renewable hydroelectric power generation is on a project by project basis based on environmental and ecosystem impact.
Edit: forgot to mention, the impact on indigenous lands as well in many of the colonized countries.
I've been reading the whole debate with Yog and Grain and I just want to say I generally agree with you on that point. Maybe it's the debate bro in me but it feels hypocritical that we always bring up the per capita ratio except when it looks good.
But overall, the biggest China W is when compared to a comparable capitalist country: India. That's the proof of socialism's superiority
Just want to point to this annual statistical publication by the IRENA (International Renewable Energy Agency) for more details about the type of renewables by country and numbers over a decade: Renewable energy statistics 2023 https://www.irena.org/Publications/2023/Jul/Renewable-energy-statistics-2023
For example it shows that total renewable energy capacity in
2013: Worldwide = 1567 GW, Europe = 419 GW, North America = 273 GW, China = 359 GW
2022: Worldwide = 3382 GW, Europe = 706 GW, North America = 491 GW, China = 1161 GW
It also shows energy production of those renewables in GWh for those interested.