The reason this is interesting: looking at the NAS's recent report on negative carbon emission technologies, many cost less than $20 per tonne of CO2 removed. The US produces ~5 Gt of CO2/yr. If the $20 was scalable, that would be well under 1% of GDP. ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda … )
-
-
Show this thread
-
Of course "If scalable" is bearing a huge load in that tweet!
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Since you're doing the research, have you seen a figure re the number of asthma cases that would have happened had the NAAQS criteria pollutants not been implemented during that time period ? Cost of treating these diseases/ deaths that didn't happen ?
-
I haven't. But I believe the EPA looked at it in some of the reports. This may have it (I haven't checked): https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/contsetc.pdf …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.