It is certainly one way to compare. But in terms of global change, absolute numbers must be considered. No matter hours many people there are, we all breathe the same air. With more people in the area, there’s more pollutants in the air, whether it’s per capita or not. So while it may be logical to compare per capita, it’s not really the practical reality.
Canada has low population density, poor public transit, a very fossil heavy economy, and it’s taking significantly slower and less drastic steps towards becoming green compared to Europe and China.
Instead of giving ourselves a pass by looking at it from the only statistical lens that obfuscates all of those things by dramatically over-weighing our low population, instead you should be demanding more.
Do you know what a ranking of countries by total emissions looks like? A ranking of countries by population, with some small reordering at certain indices. How is that useful for anything scientific?
I’m sorry but you’re just plain wrong.
By that same reasoning we can’t criticize billionaires for contributing 100s of times as much in carbon emissions as the average person because of their lifestyles.
Per capita analysis tells us which countries have poor transit infrastructure, harmful lifestyles, legacy fossil-based economies. Total emissions analysis tells us which countries are more populated. Cool.
The only logical way to compare countries’ climate progress is per capita…
It is certainly one way to compare. But in terms of global change, absolute numbers must be considered. No matter hours many people there are, we all breathe the same air. With more people in the area, there’s more pollutants in the air, whether it’s per capita or not. So while it may be logical to compare per capita, it’s not really the practical reality.
Canada has low population density, poor public transit, a very fossil heavy economy, and it’s taking significantly slower and less drastic steps towards becoming green compared to Europe and China.
Instead of giving ourselves a pass by looking at it from the only statistical lens that obfuscates all of those things by dramatically over-weighing our low population, instead you should be demanding more.
Do you know what a ranking of countries by total emissions looks like? A ranking of countries by population, with some small reordering at certain indices. How is that useful for anything scientific?
I’m sorry but you’re just plain wrong.
By that same reasoning we can’t criticize billionaires for contributing 100s of times as much in carbon emissions as the average person because of their lifestyles.
Per capita analysis tells us which countries have poor transit infrastructure, harmful lifestyles, legacy fossil-based economies. Total emissions analysis tells us which countries are more populated. Cool.