They also seem to completely ignore the pandemic when it comes to explaining the sudden decline of emissions in 2020 which obviously had a dramatic effect. Remember that emissions went down worldwide during that time.

And then they make no mention of inflation when they talk about the growth of the GDP after the beginning of the pandemic, suggesting that somehow the tax caused the increase in GDP.

I'm all for measures to reduce emissions but this article is purposefully misleading and counterproductive to the effort.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

The Y-scale got me. 😅

[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

With something like carbon emissions, it’s going to be very difficult to control for every other variable, however, the difference from peak to 2022 is an over 12% decline. If that rate stays steady enough, that’s a huge victory overall.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'd be interested to see where 2023 is. It was the first year which seemed like there were no pandemic restrictions, including the "back-to-office" rush which happened mid-2023.

[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

For sure. I’m not sure what the turn time is on compiling that data, but it’d be interesting to see.

Honestly, any kind of double digit reduction from peak seems like it would be worth considering iterating elsewhere in the world.