@PopovichN - Today you extolled “carbon-free electricity.” That’s not, true. The finance, development, and people paid are all part of the fossil economy, and there’s no room for ever doubling energy use impacts, as THAT, not the fuels is the problem! http

@BoscoloRoberta There’s a deep systemic error in the measurement if food system impacts. It’s that nominally 4/5 of the impacts are of the operations and human services required in the supply chain. https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@NJHagens On EROI, you must have seen my 2011 paper, Systems Energy Assessment, in Charlie Hall’s special collection. Did you reference it in your EROI thesis? That powerful systems physics seems like what we need for general externality accounting. https:

@MikeHudema Well.. 100% clean except for the likely 80% dirty payments for the overhead: the people and supply chains that make it work. Look for the truth, not better lies! Growth is invariably a plan to change plans! https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

🤓🤯 System Energy Assessment (SEA), Defining a Standard Measure of EROI for Energy Businesses as Whole Systems https://t.co/ZSQadFRmID #mdpisustainability via @Sus_MDPI

@KateRaworth @RishiSunak @TrussellTrust Wouldn’t it be good to find how to tell people that for us prosperity is a much better indicator of our rate of destroying our future than saving it? Globalization makes our earth impacts closely proportional to ou

@EarthJustice Could there be a class action suit, perhaps for entire Earth fraud? reference also https://t.co/JvYSrlDdDY https://t.co/kUGpObI4Md

@POTUS, It might surprise you to learn that there’s a solid proof that the CO2 emissions a person pays for a year is directly proportional to their share of GDP. A fun fact, useful too. https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@Machiavellecon You mention the political resistance to asking high consuming economies to reduce. There's an impact accounting issue too, that the rich countries don't count much of their external supply chain impacts. I've fought for years and had littl

RT @JLydiaHenshaw: @ClimatePsych @djspratt There’s an accounting trick too tempting not to be used for dramatically deflating your carbon b…

@ClimatePsych @djspratt There’s an accounting trick too tempting not to be used for dramatically deflating your carbon budget, that carbon accounting is within borders... and the fossil economy is global. For a huge savings only count what you pay for ins

Very cool EROI paper here: ~‘scope 4’ emissions, one for the reading list

@gordonschuecker @dan613 @hausfath @theresphysics @_ppmv @doublingtime My 2011 paper was on EROI calculation, showing that the energy costs of energy would quite often be off by 400 % or more, due to neglecting the energy cost of business people and supply

@g_kallis FYI my 2011 paper on estimating the total impact of business supply and delivery chains. https://t.co/JvYSrlDdDY Very oddly I’ve suggested to numerous supposed experts the value of stating the business and whole system impacts side by side, with

@howisthewater @jasonhickel @R_Degrowth The chart is said to be for lifestyle choices, as for individuals. Where does the 36% of GDP for government fit in? The rub is CO2 production is only reported for businesses, not shares of GDP at all. Would be good

@DelGib Delphine, You picked up on my question for Mark today about whether we include supply and delivery tree impacts. Generally oot, it's a boundary problem I wrote a good paper on in 2011. Happy to talk FYI. [email protected]">@synapse9.com">[email protected] https://t.co/YNSE0tsF

@jasonhickel The difference may come from how countries avoid counting outsourced environmental services. Scope 1, 2, & 3 measures for CO2, count only CO2 produced by business operations, not what's paid for. The CO2 paid for is commonly 400% greate

@CapInstitute @Microsoft Unfortunately, I think "carbon negative" for high consumption industries just shows the defect of measuring Scope 1, 2, & 3, which totally ignore 80% of the CO2 footprint in the business's economic supply chain. SEA is better

Sometimes the best data is quite misleading. EU data on CO2 doesn't show the global accelerating rise because GHG standards neglect to count the large majority of global business operations! https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh @aleksj @billmckibben @bbaue https://t.co

@BijsterveldRon The likely reason EU CO2 is in decline, and Global growing ever faster, is EU ignoring most remote operations. Our GHG accounting standards exclude nominally 4/5 of supply chain impacts, an ancient dodge of responsibility for impacts of mo

@Sustainable2050 @energynetworks You know the damn thing about "net zero" calculation is it was fudged long ago, entirely omitting the #global CO2 footprints of #people and #machines employed counting only impacts traced locally. See the well regarded pape

@HannahRitchie02 @aleksj @Piotr_Ciesla1 It's refreshing to see another way of estimating consumption CO2. I think it might undercount the CO2 consumption of human services, I estimated per $ to be 0.9*WorldAvgCO2/$GDP-PPP, to be sure to count government t

@Google 2018 Environmental Report just great... EXCEPT, THE ACCOUNTING MODEL has a flaw, EXCLUDING ~400% +/- MORE ENERGY USE FROM EMPLOYING VARIOUS SERVICE SUPPLY CHAIN TREES! It's the main reason sustainability is not having a global effect!! I can help

@nytclimate @bradplumer Countries #outsourcing CO2 is MUCH BIGGER than you found. ISO metrics count only traced operational CO2 footprints, ignoring economic #outsourcing of footprints by paying people!!! https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh https://t.co/61C5lPNSCp

@NewsfromScience The main reason the effort to break the link between GDP growth and CO2 growth has had exactly no effect is quite simple. The exact estimates of technology CO2 effects leave out the average CO2 effects of money. https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh ht

System Energy Assessment (SEA), Defining a Standard Measure of EROI for Energy Businesses as Whole Systems https://t.co/5NTsL4KSHr

@ComplexityInst Great natural patterns expose systemic evodevo!! https://t.co/A1zKc9EEdE and https://t.co/JoT9dPZXui https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@Daniel_Marbella @davidgraeber well peer reviewed new science on whole system accounting, showing where the error is https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@Revkin @IRENA @SciDevNet I published basic reasons for #miscalculating in 2011, CO2 of human services not reported. https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@SharonZivkovic It applies a new scientific method of whole system accounting "Systems Energy Assessment". https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

RT @toughLoveforx: System Energy Assessment (SEA), Defining a Standard Measure of EROI for Energy Businesses as Whole Systems https://t.co/…

System Energy Assessment (SEA), Defining a Standard Measure of EROI for Energy Businesses as Whole Systems https://t.co/wwBtEpVvBS

@NatureNews Yea! Once someone routinely asked if there was a way to know our shares of the economy's global impacts! https://t.co/YNSE0tsFyh

@UNEP_FI @Forest500 To do that honestly takes a whole system assessment method, to not leave lots uncounted. https://t.co/YNSE0tb49H

@KateRaworth only remember that doughnuts always leak - indeed @CapInstitute told me about this https://t.co/hPI2oYFujX

The vision may be ecological, but the implied efficiency promise is pure control paradigm http://t.co/bBveoZ0E4N https://t.co/unP4TzzfcP

The vision may be ecological, but the implied efficiency promise is pure control paradigm http://t.co/bBveoZ0E4N https://t.co/unP4TzzfcP

The vision may be ecological, but the implied efficiency promise is pure control paradigm http://t.co/bBveoZ0E4N https://t.co/unP4TzzfcP

The vision may be ecological, but the implied efficiency promise is pure control paradigm http://t.co/bBveoZ0E4N https://t.co/unP4TzzfcP

@DCCbeta http://t.co/bBveoZiNiV

@cjsequeira See also the work of JL Henshaw @shoudaknown on this issue: http://t.co/S3u6n3pB (a shorter version will be posted soon)