This plot does NOT show that "CO₂ per unit energy has remained flat" Glen. It shows that it increased through about 2010 and has been decreasing ever since. This is not a trivial distinction.
-
-
-
"Relatively flat"... (not much space in a tweet to describe all ups and downs)
- Još 10 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Jeez that yellow line is disappointing. What the hell have we been doing for the past 20 years?
-
Not replacing nuclear...
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I tried to talk about this here, using a similar equation, but without GDP. From my perspective, GDP integrates too many different things, making it more difficult to understand what we need to do. https://a-few-ideas.com/our-impacts-our-planet/ …pic.twitter.com/TbgzQiUcQ0
-
Something like this, just taking GDP out of the equation. In a sense, it is quite surprising how much Energy/Population changes give the constant growth in population. We did something a little similar here https://rdcu.be/bor0g pic.twitter.com/qXA9ucP1fH
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
@RogerPielkeJr do you have this broken out by continent or major economic blocs. Because policy implications generally vary. -
I have some tweets coming in the next days. OECD vs nonOECD, & USA, China, India, & EU, and in principle, it is the press of a button to do any other country. Yes, big differences between regions.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Would be useful to break this down into key polluting countries causing the trends. China will be key since ~2000 I imagine
-
Here is a version for OECD vs non-OECD, I have some country figures coming tomorrow...https://twitter.com/Peters_Glen/status/1181098078037655553 …
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.