/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10745415
Lemme borrow the thread with some climate questions:

How can the populating in Beijing triple (40 million people -> 120 million people), while introducing infrastructure, cars, and a much higher energy use/person, coal power plants to fuel it all, and so on, while having a temperature which is somewhat unaffected by it?

Surely, if global warming is a thing, shouldn't it apply first and foremost on a local level? Beijing SHOULD be the prime example of increasing temperatures. But it's not really. How is this explained?

Sources (shitty, ofc, but as rough estimates they should get my point across):
>https://books.mongabay.com/population_estimates/full/Beijing-China.html
>https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa68e8/pdf