As Chinese companies have increased their overseas mining operations, allegations of problems caused by these projects have steadily risen.

The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, an NGO, says such troubles are “not unique to Chinese mining” but last year it published a report listing 102 allegations made against Chinese companies involved in extracting critical minerals, ranging from violations of the rights of local communities to damage to ecosystems and unsafe working conditions.

These allegations dated from 2021 and 2022. The BBC has counted more than 40 further allegations that were made in 2023, and reported by NGOs or in the media.

  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    You’re still not telling me how much carbon output would be generated by electrifying every rail line on the planet.

    Lol, I don’t see how that pertains to this argument? You haven’t answered a number of my questions, I’m just not choosing to be pedantic about it.

    You’re not telling how long it will take to replace every car in America, or what the carbon output of that replacement and disposal of old vehicles would be.

    Stop being an academically dishonest ass, and just admit you are speaking out of ignorance.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Odd that I’m not answering the questions you asked after I asked mine, isn’t it?

      Expecting me to answer them first seems dishonest to me…

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Lol, I have answered your question, just not to your pedantic standards. There is no study that encompasses every rail network in the world, just as there is no study that encompasses every combustion engine in the world. As the world isn’t working as a single entity to fight climate change.

        I have given plenty of evidence to support my argument, you have only supplied two articles that did not support your argument, and we’re about the same train system.

        You aren’t arguing in good faith, you’re just employing one logical fallacy after another because that’s all you have to rely on.

        Expecting me to answer them first seems dishonest to me…

        You made the original claim that there wasn’t a better answer than battery powered vehicles, so the burden of evidence is in your court. An affirmation made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, but I was actually trying to educate you over a very important topic.

        I guess that’s my fault for assuming that someone as terminally online as yourself could put their ego aside for meaningful discourse.