3 ms·
You don't understand what you are talking about. EKC works with pollutants that have short term, acute consequences. Think sulfates, nitrates, carbon monoxide,
by biglenny 8y ago
You don't understand what you are talking about.
EKC works with pollutants that have short term, acute consequences. Think sulfates, nitrates, carbon monoxide, etc.
EKC has not been proven true with pollutants whose effects are less concentrated and whose effects take longer to realize (CH4, CO2, etc). The catastrophes I'm referring to have little to do with the paper you cited.
- antidesitter 8y agoAccording to https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Presentation19-The-RelationshipBetweenCarbonDioxideEmissionsandEconomicGrowth-MGrubbBMullerLButler-2004.pdf https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2011/0..., it seems that there is a positive correlation between GDP per capita and carbon emissions per capita at first, but the correlation stops after that and becomes neutral. In the UK and US, for example, carbon emissions per capita remained roughly constant over a 50 year period even as GDP per capita increased significantly.
- biglenny 8y agoArea under the curve.
- antidesitter 8y agoWhat do you mean?