> Per capita does not matter, totals do. I have no idea how this point gets brought up every time when it is so obvious to refute. We, as a civilizations, hav

> Per capita does not matter, totals do. I have no idea how this point gets brought up every time when it is so obvious to refute. We, as a civilizations, have some amount of CO2 per year that we can emit without catastrophic consequences. You are basically arguing the US/European citizens should be allowed to emit a completely outsized proportion of that CO2 budget, which to me is very clearly unethical. Also consider: 1) China splits into 10 individual states- suddenly their emissions don't matter anymore using your accounting?! 2) It seems absoutely obvious to me that reducing CO2 emissions by the same amount is MUCH easier if you start from a higher baseline: Saving a ton of CO2/year for a US family basically means "fewer individual trips on the second car the family owns". For an Indian rice farmer to save one ton means "no heating during winter". It seems to me that you think "the west" is some kind of role model in CO2 emissions, and the onus is on developing nations to "follow the same standards"-- but that is complete bullshit; "the west" (especially the US) is doing much WORSE than basically every developing nation (which becomes very clear from CO2/capita numbers).