4 ms·
> Next, using analysis based on per capita, % of GDP, etc — hides the truth, UK’s subsidies by total amount spent are significant to the industry. actually it’
by kmlx 4y ago
> Next, using analysis based on per capita, % of GDP, etc — hides the truth, UK’s subsidies by total amount spent are significant to the industry.
actually it’s the opposite to “hiding the truth”.
my link shows UK’s subsidising oil and gas is actually quite in line with the rest of Europe.
total sums are quite irrelevant and they hide the truth. that is why all of these papers show gdp % and per capita, not total sums. i think the reason is quite obvious.
- O__________O 4y agoFrom the industry’s perspective, they don’t care about per capita, they care about the total amount. From the perspective of managing climate change, per capita analysis makes it easier to hide overall significance of the subsidies; aka 10k pop with 1k in subsidies on a per capita basis would be equivalent to 100k pop with 10k in subsidies; killing the 10k in subsidies of the 100k pop country would have 10x the impact on the industry. This is not about being fair to countries, it’s about having as much impact as fast as possible.