this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
35 points (97.3% liked)
Australia
3582 readers
254 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This kind of statistic bugs me.
The people of NT are probably not using/emitting any more CO2 than you or me. It's the companies that are sucking gas out of the ground, and per capita is IRRELEVANT.
So, why not use a denominator that's actually useful?
Showing it as per capita helps great polluters shift the blame to the common people and foster doomerism.
Or the journalist that wrote this doesn't understand statistics.
It’s relevant in so far as what it says about the extreme carbon intensity of the NT’s economic activity and the current plans to increase that dependence even further.
Per capita is not necessarily relevant from an environmental standpoint directly but it means quite a lot when it comes to gathering the political will to end these emissions and our uncounted carbon exports.
So they cherrypicked this as something to pick on NT about? While implying that the other states are 'not so bad'? Why should VIC or NSW do anything when NT is twice as bad? And worse than all those petro states too!
If they want to be truthful, they'd just say "NT has the smallest production and the largest reserves in Australia, and we want to stop that".