I'm not sure what your point is. Greenhouse gas emissions (chiefly carbon dioxide and methane) don't cause smog (caused by ground level ozone and nitrogen oxides).
Greenhouse gas emissions are not smog, and they're not air pollution in the normal sense of hurting people in their immediate vicinity.
Greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global climate change, and the per capita GHG emissions of Mississippians are more than twice as high as the per capita GHG emissions of Europeans, regardless of the local air quality.
Also, that was only one part of my comment. The other part is that most Europeans enjoy all kinds of public infrastructure intricately related to living standards that Mississippians do not. The US has decided that impeccable road infrastructure is the sine qua non of public nonmilitary expenditure, but there is an enormous opportunity cost tied into a national land use and transportation model based on ubiquitous motoring and related low densities.
Total car dependence plus industrial food and big box retail minus actual neighbourhoods, family farming or even gardening equals an ecological and public health disaster in slow motion.
Yes, but the discussion was about whether Mississippi pays higher social costs than Europe. This has nothing to do with how much C02 Mississippi itself releases.
GHG emissions are an economic externality so vast that they're driving the planet's climate into crisis. Sooner or later those costs will be internalized one way or another. In the meantime, the cost of living in places like Mississippi that have extremely high per capita emissions benefits from a huge artificial subsidy that isn't being taken into account.
Comments
I'm not sure what your point is. Mississipi has many, many problems, but smog isn't one of them.
I'm not sure what your point is. Greenhouse gas emissions (chiefly carbon dioxide and methane) don't cause smog (caused by ground level ozone and nitrogen oxides).
Edit 2 Moved reply into reply.
Fine, Ryan. s/smog/air quality. The air quality in Jackson is not detectably poorer than that in most of Germany.
Greenhouse gas emissions are not smog, and they're not air pollution in the normal sense of hurting people in their immediate vicinity.
Greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global climate change, and the per capita GHG emissions of Mississippians are more than twice as high as the per capita GHG emissions of Europeans, regardless of the local air quality.
Also, that was only one part of my comment. The other part is that most Europeans enjoy all kinds of public infrastructure intricately related to living standards that Mississippians do not. The US has decided that impeccable road infrastructure is the sine qua non of public nonmilitary expenditure, but there is an enormous opportunity cost tied into a national land use and transportation model based on ubiquitous motoring and related low densities.
See, for example:
* http://www.newsweek.com/id/76929
* http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/subprime
Total car dependence plus industrial food and big box retail minus actual neighbourhoods, family farming or even gardening equals an ecological and public health disaster in slow motion.
Yes, but the discussion was about whether Mississippi pays higher social costs than Europe. This has nothing to do with how much C02 Mississippi itself releases.
GHG emissions are an economic externality so vast that they're driving the planet's climate into crisis. Sooner or later those costs will be internalized one way or another. In the meantime, the cost of living in places like Mississippi that have extremely high per capita emissions benefits from a huge artificial subsidy that isn't being taken into account.