|
|
|
|
|
by foobiekr
2395 days ago
|
|
The per-capita argument only makes sense if one expects the carbon footprint of the citizenry to be relatively equal. What this creates, instead, is that in really large countries the allocation will be taken by the people living really energy-intensive lives while letting the bulk of the population live poorly. The other problem is that this incentivizes population increases since energy is the limiting factor for a developed nation's GDP and they can effectively raise their limit by having more children. That's not a good thing either and goes directly against the fertility declines that are about the only good news we have. Per capita is one way to slice it, but it's not the definition of "fair." |
|