This report does not say what the Guardian headline writers think it does:
Three Americans create enough carbon emissions to kill one person, study finds
The analysis draws on public health studies that conclude that for every 4,434 metric tons of CO2 produced, one person globally will die
Nope, that's not what it does say:
The lifestyles of around three average Americans will create enough planet-heating emissions to kill one person, and the emissions from a single coal-fired power plant are likely to result in more than 900 deaths, according to the first analysis to calculate the mortal cost of carbon emissions.
The new research builds upon what is known as the “social cost of carbon”, a monetary figure placed upon the damage caused by each ton of carbon dioxide emissions, by assigning an expected death toll from the emissions that cause the climate crisis.
The analysis draws upon several public health studies to conclude that for every 4,434 metric tons of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere beyond the 2020 rate of emissions, one person globally will die prematurely from the increased temperature. This additional CO2 is equivalent to the current lifetime emissions of 3.5 Americans.
This is about the marginal emissions above the 2020 rate. Which is useful because that number is falling:
So Americans are saving lives then.
Of course, the report and model being used is bollocks anyway. Firstly this:
In the baseline emissions scenario
Yes, they've used RCP 8.5 which is, as we all know, entire bollocks. Precisely because, as we all know and the...
I've been - vaguely and not with any great interest - anticipating a story like this:
Scarlett Johansson sues Walt Disney over Marvel’s Black Widow release
Actress could lose out on up to $50m after the film was released on the streaming service Disney+ at the same time as the box office
The thing being that the search for new revenue sources does tend to advance faster than the contractual arrangements of who gets which part of that new revenue.
The first bit is that the movies are a tournament business. The big, big, stars who can green light a movie are few and far between. It is as with the football business therefore, left alone and static all the revenue and more will end up going to those stars, players. In order for the capitalists to make their nut it's necessary for there to be some countervailing factor.
American sports do this...
We have a delightful example of how Richard Murphy simply doesn't understand the basic nuts and bolts of the economics he wants to impose upon us all. Effectively, he's rediscovering the basics of monetary theory - and thus the nuts and bolts of monetarism.
What does this all mean? It means that we are living in a world where not all pounds, dollars, euros, yen or whatever are equal. How they came into being makes a big difference to what they are and what interest rate should be used on them, and whether they should be considered as debt, or not. This is a theme of a paper I will be issuing very soon. But what that also means is that if this power to create and manage money is to be properly used - and it is essential that it is - then this has to be understood...
Not that we should be all that surprised by this from the progressives at Vox. No government- well, no one not controlled by Trump or KKK Amerikka - would ever do something that was, overall, harmful now, would they? Any bureaucratic or political decision and insistence is only, ever, entirely appropriate and necessary:
The decisions in Branch and Florida, moreover, are part of a wave of decisions — mostly handed down by Republican appointees or by judges who ran for election as conservatives — that could permanently hobble the government’s ability to address future public health crises.
Except that's the very point of our having a constitution. Or, as we Brits don't, having even the concepts of human rights or civil liberties. There are some things the government cannot do to us. Even under the grandest of pressures.
Or even, there's a gradation in these things. In the middle of the...
There's been a certain amount - OK, a lot - of squealing in the US about how democracy is the ultimate value and we must therefore respect it, do nothing to limit it and so on. Which is what makes this screeching u-turn so amusing:
Infrastructure Summer: The Untrained Bipartisan Deal-Makers
The senators negotiating the infrastructure package don’t have expertise in infrastructure, and it’s showing.
Gee Willy Willikins. You mean the elected but ignorant aren't quite the right people to be running the country in detail? Because, you know, they're ignorant?
Which does put a certain roadblock in the way of that we must obey every dictat of democracy really, doesn't it?
It’s through this tortuous channel that the bipartisan bill has run aground. You have a bunch of freelancers—with next to no familiarity with the infrastructure matters on which other Senate committees work—hammering out an infrastructure bill.