Quote:For decades, environmental activists along with some government officials and scientists have argued that rich countries, who have historically emitted the most greenhouse gases, should pay the most to address climate change, and even pay poor countries reparations.
A new study by two Dartmouth scientists aims to calculate just how much economic impact larger emitters have caused other nations. Published Tuesday in the journal Climatic Change, the study says the figures could be used in courtrooms and in international climate negotiations about payments from rich nations that burn more coal, oil and gas, to poor countries damaged by emissions.
For example, the data shows that the top carbon emitter over time, the United States, has caused more than $1.9 trillion in climate damage to other countries from 1990 to 2014, including $310 billion in damage to Brazil, $257 billion in damage to India, $124 billion to Indonesia, $104 billion to Venezuela and $74 billion to Nigeria.
(07-13-2022 09:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Wonder what their methodology and assumptions were. I can do a "study" to come up with most any answer you want, depending on how I rig it.
I didn’t read the Bs but found interesting in the excerpt posted that two scientist were looking at the economic impact. Is that economist or actual scientist? If the former, makes zero sense. If the latter, an honest economist would tell you there’s a reason it’s theory because as you noted so flipping complicated just a little bias in your equations and you can basically come up with whatever number you want.
No China on the list. Hahah yikes. Hopefully India is on there at least. Brits owe them reparations too?
(This post was last modified: 07-13-2022 10:07 PM by natibeast2.0.)
This story is misdirection and cover for the actual story they are burying. Its the green agenda that is systematically crippling nations across the globe, but our media is ignoring it.
Smaller countries are being totally crushed by this, Tucker broke it down last night in his opening segment.
Its worth a watch, the details are remarkable. Nations that had reliable power grids and water a few years ago suddenly can't supply water or power to their citizens. And farmers have been targeted and crushed.
Sound familiar?
(This post was last modified: 07-13-2022 10:27 PM by ericsrevenge76.)
(07-13-2022 09:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Wonder what their methodology and assumptions were. I can do a "study" to come up with most any answer you want, depending on how I rig it.
Right—for instance did they credit back the increase in farming yields due to the use of machinery, fertilizers, medicines, and technology that was the end product of the US greenhouse gas producing activity. I suspect not.
(This post was last modified: 07-13-2022 10:40 PM by Attackcoog.)
And its not just the poor countries, farmers in the Netherlands are being crushed, South Africa is dealing with rolling blackouts that often last 8 hours or more. French companies are demanding the citizens immediately reduce consumption of fuel, oil, electricity and gas due to shortages, 6 million households in the UK are facing power cuts this year. In parts of Germany, warm water may only be avaible during certain parts of the day in case of emergency.
The list of countries is a mile long. The higher their green ESG score, the more crippled their energy, power and water gets.
And yet were are not hearing jack in the media about any of this.
(This post was last modified: 07-13-2022 10:39 PM by ericsrevenge76.)
(07-13-2022 10:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote: And its not just the poor countries, farmers in the Netherlands are being crushed, South Africa is dealing with rolling blackouts that often last 8 hours or more. French companies are demanding the citizens immediately reduce consumption of fuel, oil, electricity and gas due to shortages, 6 million households in the UK are facing power cuts this year. In parts of Germany, warm water may only be avaible during certain parts of the day in case of emergency.
The list of countries is a mile long. The higher their green ESG score, the more crippled their energy, power and water gets.
And yet were are not hearing jack in the media about any of this.
Meanwhile multi-billionaire Bill Gates is buying up farmland across the USA....and possibly other countries? It isn't a wild stretch to imagine other global billionaire elitists doing the same in EU, Australia, etc.
(07-13-2022 09:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Wonder what their methodology and assumptions were. I can do a "study" to come up with most any answer you want, depending on how I rig it.
Right—for instance did they credit back the increase in farming yields due to the use of machinery, fertilizers, medicines, and technology that was the end product of the US greenhouse gas producing activity. I suspect not.
Another case of using selective data to support an argument. There’s lies, damn lies and then there is statistics.
Quote:We find that the top five emitters (the United States, China, Russia, Brazil, and India) have collectively caused US$6 trillion in income losses from warming since 1990
If you look to the right on the linked page, you can also see info regarding research methods used and funding, which is also something that should always be looked into, for obvious reasons.
BTW, here's the info on funding:
Quote:This work was supported by National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship #1840344 to C.W.C. and grants from Dartmouth’s Neukom Computational Institute, the Wright Center for the Study of Computation and Just Communities, and the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center to J.S.M.
Haven't had time to see who is behind the funding.
