cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/51078361
Here, using high-resolution satellite-retrieved data and interpretable machine learning techniques, this study quantified the impact of NEVs on atmospheric pollution, specifically particulate matter particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 μm or less (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 μm or less, and evaluates the corresponding health benefits. By 2023, NEVs led to reductions of 23.80% in particles with a diameter of 2.5 μm or less (8.97 µg m−3) and 30.67% in carbon monoxide (0.26 mg m−3), resulting in the prevention of approximately 262,000 non-accidental deaths and 75,000 all-cause deaths, respectively.
Self reported stats from China have been known to be off by a factor of 10. They’re still the worlds largest consumer of coal and their population density likely leads to statistically worse outcomes.
I was referring to public health outcomes data.
You could say the same of any countries reporting. I wouldn’t specifically believe a word from the us, EU or UK without actually verifying it. The fact they are reporting it though shows they believe there is some positive impact. They know somebody will check, and if it’s total bs, it will be shown to be. Interesting to read about, but I will take the numbers and impact with a pinch of salt 👍
No, you absolutely cannot say that of any nation. Most nations use international third party authorities to gather and verify stats, or at least nonpartisan unbiased government offices.
China gets caught in outrageous lies so often you’d think their dempgraphers were fantasy fiction authors.
I believe Chinese reports just as much as when trump or Burnham or anybody else with a motive to manipulate information and present it as fact.
If you choose to believe other countries reports as unbiased and completely genuine, then 8 feel sorry for you.