3 ms·

It saves 89 people from NOx-related deaths. It is also a necessary step to reach carbon neutrality, which will save more lives.

• reissbaker 4y ago
  Do you think that $34 billion could save, say, more than 89 people if spent on a more effective plan?
  • adrianN 4y ago
    Sure, you could spend the money to build renewables and electrify some developing nation. But it would be a hard political sale to ask two million Californians to spend a couple thousand dollars to help people in Africa or wherever.
  • apple4ever 4y ago
    Too often people forget to make this type of calculation. I get it - it sucks to have to make that type of choice! But in a world with limited resources - of which the cost is just an indirect indication of - we have to. We need to better understand the downsides and alternatives of proposed, not just the upsides. We need to not call people who point them out "killers who hate the environment" and instead listen and work together toward the best solution possible, not the one that sounds the best without understand the details.