Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr
That's a quite controversial matter. Didn't you know some people still rely on firewood illegally sourced at native forests in poor countries for cooking, and the poor ventilation at some 3rd-world kitchens lead to a higher concentration of carbon monoxide? That's just one example of how povertry may be tied to environmental devastation, since some people couldn't afford a greenwash.
When it comes to transportation, there might be a few countries where brand-new carburettor-fed cars are still available, not to mention some motorcycles that despite the lower fuel consumption have emission ratings worse than a U.S.-spec subcompact such as a Yaris or a Mirage. And even the methane from decomposing horse or donkey manure on the streets in places where horse-drawn carts are still not unusual (which unfortunately includes my hometown Porto Alegre where I still see horse-drawn carts once in a while) has a longer half-life than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not to mention some eventual biological hazard of such manure.
|
The point I wanted to emphasize,was that fossil-fuel combustion is equivalent to burning the entire world's forest cover (WFC),fifteen times each year.
Burning all Earth's forest,then burning it again,then again and again,until we've burned it fifteen times each year.
15-WFC,resolved into a single forest fire,is 1.7-X larger than the entire surface area of Earth,oceans,ice caps,glaciers,rivers,lakes,ponds,streams included.
Each year.
It's not as 'dramatic' as a burning/smoking Amazonian clear-cut,and
I'm not trying to trivialize what marginalized people are doing,when pushed to the margins of civilization;however,'decent',well-paid 1st-worlders may want to consider the impact of their daily consumer behavior and lifestyle which can be directly measured from NASA's mission to planet Earth.