While I do agree that slowing the increase of carbon emissions is a good sign, the article also made me think about how we decide to measure our impact on the environment. To my knowledge, we don't have a "deforestation index" that we regularly compare to GDP, which I feel would be important to combine with carbon emissions because it's decreasing a way to take carbon dioxide out of the air. It would also probably be connected to GDP because of how frequently we use wood for things like furniture, buildings, paper, etc that it would similarly rise when GDP rises. On top of that, there isn't much focus on other kinds of pollution like littering or industrial wastes. So while the article implies that GDP growth is starting to become disconnection from pollution, I think we need to look further into the historical impacts on the environment and how they relate to GDP (as well as their current levels) before we make that call.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/science-and-health/23547051/greenhouse-gas-emissions-2022-increase-inflation-gas-price-climate-change-gdp
1 comment:
Overall, great post Elizabeth! I do agree with your point that there should be more environmental impact measures that should be compared regularly. As someone who is currently in Environmental Economics, I would say that another measure that could be beneficial is to look at our plastic bag usage. It's a small thing but California, they have seen a positive impact from banning plastic bags and it has encouraged the use of reusable bags.
Post a Comment