• 0 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle


  • Sensationalist headline as far as I can tell.

    (I wrote the same in a different sub as this seems to have been posted all over)

    Comparing carbon emissions and only telling that it is more than another plants/industrial sites, is pretty useless. It needs to be normalized to emissions/kWh so it would be a useful comparison. That alone gives me pause as to how accurate/honest the comparison is.

    For example: the plant could be the largest in the country which would mean emoting more is normal. Or it could be the smallest and have a disproportionate emission rate.

    It also seems like the spokesperson of the plant claims that the wood is sourced from sustainably managed forests, and though I won’t take that at face value, I see how that could further mitigate impact compared to what the sensationalist headline claims.

    I don’t have time right now to do much more research on this specific site such as where the forest is, transportation emissions, processing emissions, etc. However, it is clear that the author of the article didn’t do any research either, and/or intentionally cherry picked a way to display the data to come up with an article that would drive traffic.