China launches test runs for world’s largest plant that can convert coal to ethanol(www.scmp.com)

posted 10 months ago

L4sBot@lemmy.worldMB

technology@lemmy.world

62 commentshide report

China launches test runs for world’s largest plant that can convert coal to ethanol::undefined

Sort:

Hot Top Controversial New Old

You are viewing a single thread.

View all comments

[ - ]

CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world

26 points

10 months ago

What a waste of time,money, and resources

permalink

report

[ - ]

Oderus@lemmy.world

11 points

10 months ago

China has ghost cities with empty apartment buildings. They have tons of resources to waste.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

dmonzel@lemmy.ml

-4 points

10 months ago

Tell me you’re living half a decade in the past without telling me. “Ghost cities” are actually areas where the state preplanned urbanization so everything would be in place when people started moving in. In fact, most of these “ghost cities” are actually populated now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under-occupied_developments_in_China

Edit: could someone please explain why I’m being downvoted? I’ve provided a source to back up my statements. Or is this a case of “everything about China is bad because Red Scare”?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

falkerie71@sh.itjust.works

20 points

10 months ago

There’s another side to this. “Pre-planning” without proper forecast led to the housing crisis we are seeing today in China, with one of the largest developers in China Evergrande defaulting and filing for bankruptcy. A lot of people who were promised a good property and sunk their life savings into the project, now have no choice but to live in unfinished buildings in ghost towns without electricity nor water.

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/10/31/crumbling-buildings-and-broken-dreams-chinas-unfinished-homes
https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/china-home-buyers-occupy-their-rotting-unfinished-properties-2022-09-26/

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

umbrella@lemmy.ml

1 point

10 months ago

I haven’t got into the article that much but sure, nothing is perfect.

Is it better to not even try and pretend its acceptable for people to be homeless, like they do almost everywhere else?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

falkerie71@sh.itjust.works

4 points

10 months ago

They’re not building apartments to give out to homeless people for free here. People actually had to pay for those properties and were scammed.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

umbrella@lemmy.ml

-2 points

10 months ago

keeping the population homeless is better?

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments

[ - ]

anotherandrew@lemmy.mixdown.ca

2 points

10 months ago

“Nothing is perfect” Is a hell of a way to minimize the enormity of the issue. Like wow…

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

umbrella@lemmy.ml

0 points

10 months ago

at least you have something to criticize, ill take it over literally nothing any day.

report

[ - ]

11 points

10 months ago

I stated a fact and you bent over backwards trying to prove anyone who agreed with me was wrong.

Ghost cities are real. It wasn’t a ‘everything about China is bad’ comment like you whined so that’s why you’re getting downvoted.

Why get all defensive anyway? Is someone paying you to defend China from any criticism? You come across like you’re simping for China.

Do you get upset when people talk about winnie the poo?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

4am@lemm.ee

1 point

10 months ago

Defensive like downvoting facts?

Yeah some urban preplanning didn’t work out but most of those cities are filled up to the point of working now.

I remember back then all those articles - “China is building empty cities! Ha ha so dumb! Who’s gonna buy that, they all work in factories!”

It’s pretty striking that an .ml user posted a comment defending a verifiable fact, and got 10 downvotes for being “uppity”. Oh, sorry for the Wikipedia link sir, I will think more about respect for all powerful America next time

You guys really need to clean out your brainworms sometime, this shit is embarrassing

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Oderus@lemmy.world

2 points

10 months ago

I said ghost cities exist, and then you said they didn’t. That’s being defensive and then you went after other people who provided facts and you just got more defensive… and here you are now, being defensive. Do you know what being defensive means?

I don’t give 2 shits who downvotes you or why. Grow thicker skin if you can’t handle the internet son.

report

[ - ]

7 points

10 months ago

65 million empty according to your link.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

dmonzel@lemmy.ml

2 points

10 months ago

Many developments initially criticized as ghost cities did materialize into economically vibrant areas when given enough time to develop, such as Pudong, Zhujiang New Town, Zhengdong New Area, Tianducheng and malls such as the Golden Resources Mall and South China Mall.[15] While many developments failed to live up to initial lofty promises, most of them eventually became occupied when given enough time.[6][16]

Reporting in 2018, Shepard noted that “Today, China’s so-called ghost cities that were so prevalently showcased in 2013 and 2014 are no longer global intrigues. They have filled up to the point of being functioning, normal cities”.[17]

Writing in 2023, academic and former UK diplomat Kerry Brown described the idea of Chinese ghost cities as a bandwagon popular in the 2010s which was shown to be a myth.[18]: 151-152

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ABCDE@lemmy.world

9 points

10 months ago

A myth is something which never existed. They do:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67610677 https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170223-chinas-zombie-factories-and-unborn-cities https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17390729

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

dmonzel@lemmy.ml

-3 points

10 months ago

23rd February 2017

report

[ - ]

6 points

10 months ago

Here’s the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

Under-occupied developments in China were mostly unoccupied property developments in China, and frequently referred to as "ghost cities" or ghost towns. The phenomenon was observed and recorded as early as 2006 by writer Wade Shepard, and subsequently reported by news media over the decades. Although a feature of discourse on the Chinese economy and urbanization in China in the 2010s, formerly under-occupied developments have largely filled up.

^article ^| ^about

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Jin@lemmy.world

5 points

10 months ago

most of these “ghost cities” are actually populated now.

Because you believe China’s propaganda

I don’t blame you, Wikipedia sources are fairly old and everyone can add/remove stuff.

Recommend more sources after 2020

If you are bored https://youtube.com/watch?v=Qhwk3O6JHZk https://youtube.com/watch?v=dnp_MxXY9qs

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

cyruseuros@lemmy.ml

3 points

10 months ago

Not weighing in on either side of the discussion, but that’s a video that’s almost completely unrelated to the topic above.

It speaks to how overleveraged/poorly managed a lot of Chinese development was, leading to a borderline colapse of the construction industry, and largely leaves the subject of ghost cities unaddressed.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Jin@lemmy.world

2 points

10 months ago

Chinese projects / developments are short-sighted. It’s a Ponzi scheme, Get money from new investors, pay existing clients. So just keep building.

They become ghost cities because building are not fully done for living, so people can’t even move in. The Infrastructure is incomplete like no proper transportation links, no jobs, no shops etc. there is literally nothing there.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

cyruseuros@lemmy.ml

2 points

10 months ago

Ok, now I get the link you’re trying to make, but it doesn’t fully adress my question.

The one thing that’s still leaving me prickly is simply saying Wikipedia is wrong because it’s editable by anyone. That’s like saying FOSS is insecure because it’s editable by anyone. Neither the conclusion nor the premise is correct in either case. There are hierarchies & access controls in both that often yield better results than the traditional alternative.

Wikipedia is a treasure, and while it is still vulnerable to brigading (far more so than FOSS), this is far from the norm (especially nowadays) and should be backed up with specific sources and rectified.

While I do agree with you that Wikipedia shouldn’t be cited directly due to this vulnerability, it acts as an excellent contextual citation aggregator, and quite frankly I’ve often found it more up-to-date and less biased than some of the crap that made it past the peer review process in my college days.

For instance, if what you’re saying is true (shortsightedness), people may over the years still populate those areas (the claim of the Wikipedia article is that a lot/most of the ghost cities did). If you have sources stating otherwise, please report the article for manipulation and include them there. If you don’t feel like it, post them here and I will do so, despite knowing absolutely nothing about Chinese ghost cities, because I believe this is important.

Please don’t dismiss such a shining example of human collective action so lightly. It’s one of the few things that makes me believe there’s still some good left in the world.

report

[ - ]

-2 points

10 months ago

Wikipedia sources are fairly old

A few of the sources are literally from 2023. But do go on, it certainly seems like you’re here in good faith, right?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Jin@lemmy.world

-2 points

10 months ago

Yeah, I’m not saying there isn’t anything newer “A few” vs what’s up to date

Wikipedia isn’t great place for sources because everyone can post and edit. We taught in school never to source Wikipedia for that reason.

Wikipedia banned seven users after reported ‘infiltration’ by a Chinese group https://www.engadget.com/wikipedia-banned-seven-users-after-reported-infiltration-by-a-chinese-group-104143971.html?

China and Taiwan clash over Wikipedia edits https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49921173

I’m here in good faith 🙏

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

dmonzel@lemmy.ml

1 point

10 months ago

Wikipedia isn’t great place for sources because everyone can post and edit.

Then you can check the sources listed in the article. You’re not just supposed to take Wikipedia’s word for it, but you are allowed to click on the links in the references section. So either you’re not aware of this, or you’re not making this argument in good faith. In either event, because looking at the several sources in the wiki article I provided seems like it’s still not good enough for you, I get the feeling this conversation is going nowhere.

report

[ - ]

3 points

10 months ago

It’s the attitude we don’t appreciate.

Also, you’re on the back foot to start with on a .ml account.

permalink

report

parent

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

Community stats

18K
Monthly active users
12K
Posts
539K
Comments

Our Rules

Approved Bots

Community stats

Community moderators