• BZ 🇨🇦
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Glad you asked. A country is an arbitrary set of lines on a map, isn’t it? A person is a discrete object, and for statistical purposes, roughly equivalent. That’s why a ratio-scale of per capita is statistically more meaningful.

    If Vatican City had the highest per capita energy production, it would still be insignificant in practice.

    Why is that insignificant? By what measure?

    I would argue that would be an interesting data point.(e.g What would cause that? Why are the people there doing that? How would people in the Vatican who worry about climate change know there’s an issue otherwise? Etc?)

    A previous poster said (correctly) that Canadians, per capita produce more GHGs. That’s important information.

    • A country is not just its land, it’s the people living there and the economic system with which it operates. The per capita energy capacity depends entirely on how the country of the individual in question is run, and the total energy capacity of a country is not primarily determined by the number of people living there, but by its access to the necessary resources (primarily trade in China’s case, theft through imperialism in Canada’s) and the goals of its government

      Why is that insignificant? By what measure?

      In terms of stopping the destruction of the planet

      • BZ 🇨🇦
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        (primarily trade in China’s case, theft through imperialism in Canada’s)

        That’s an interesting take on that comparison. I’m not sure the people of Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Tibet would necessarily agree with that portrayal of China.

        In terms of stopping the destruction of the planet

        Why? Let’s say this was still the example… Couldn’t the reach of the Vatican and its billions of followers make a meaningful impact?

        • I’m not sure the people of Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Tibet would necessarily agree with that portrayal of China.

          If you’re not sure, then look into the history of those three regions of China before you make any hypocritical remarks, especially as someone from a genocidal settler colony like Canada

          Why? Let’s say this was still the example… Couldn’t the reach of the Vatican and its billions of followers make a meaningful impact?

          It’s far from billions, but sure, hypothetically, if all followers of the Roman Catholic Church somehow managed to seize state power in their respective countries and started producing renewable energy, it would be meaningful. Back in reality, that’s nothing but a thought experiment, and in case you genuinely didn’t realize, my use of Vatican City as an example was because of its size