2 ms·
Per-capita numbers are irrelevant if we're interested in outcomes. Chemistry doesn't stop and calculate the population responsible for a chemical emission befor
by roenxi 3y ago
Per-capita numbers are irrelevant if we're interested in outcomes. Chemistry doesn't stop and calculate the population responsible for a chemical emission before reacting.
History is also irrelevant for that matter, given that the past cannot be changed and has little bearing on the present or future of this issue.
- yareal 3y agoThat's nonsense. Per person efficiency is critical. China is more efficient than the U.S. in co2, we should learn from that. We need efficiency and a total reduction.
- roenxi 3y agoIf you get 50% more efficient in pollution/person in the US (which is already hard to see happening), total pollution will continue to increase as more people globally become wealthy. And, if they did become 50% more efficient, that doesn't change the eventual amount of pollution - it just doubles the time taken to get there. We'd still burn through all the available fossil fuels over the course of about 2 centuries so it is still all going to end up in the atmosphere. Per-capita efficiency isn't going to do anything. At least not anything that the climate-change crowd will like. Efficiency is a welcome thing for its own sake.
- Hikikomori 3y agoSo US emissions are fine, everyone else and especially China should lower, while making most of your stuff.
- roenxi 3y agoUS emissions are fine, everyone else and especially China should deploy as much cheap energy as they can without regard for carbon emissions. And I am very thankful to the Chinese for all the stuff they have made me, it is gratefully received.