A new study published in the journal Nature concludes that the world would be $28 trillion richer if we stopped using fossil fuels. Were it not for the “extreme heat” fossil fuel companies are causing, the researchers from Dartmouth College explain, we’d have a much wealthier planet.
The Dartmouth study attempts to distribute blame on how specific oil companies have allegedly contributed to the claimed $28 trillion in damages globally. According to the study, Chevron caused as much as $3.6 trillion in “heat-related losses” between 1991 and 2020. ExxonMobil is, according to the study, responsible for $1.91 trillion and adds that Saudi Aramco is responsible for $2.05 trillion.
….
It’s hard to square the Dartmouth study’s conclusions — which is that oil companies are costing society trillions — when the data show that in the time the globe has been exponentially increasing its use of fossil fuels, GDP has rapidly increased in that time.
Another point that critics have noted about the study is that it focuses solely on the alleged impacts of oil companies. Large emitters not included in the study include steel producers, auto manufacturers, utilities and cattle ranchers, but the study didn’t calculate how much wealthier the world would be without steel, cars, electricity and beef.
Media story tellers, trained in English Lit (80% have humanities degrees and no STEM background) and lacking relevant training in any STEM subjects necessary to critically assess studies like this, fail to ask the right questions.
How rich would we be if we never had widely available energy?
The above study is full of holes but the media has run with it, unable to see how nonsensical the study is.
