This is infuriatingly stupid, the whole point of using things like “longer than 4 football fields” is that most people at least have a solid idea how big a football field is so have a frame of reference, but who the hell understands the weight of the Empire State Building?!? That is just such a useless frame of reference. Height sure, volume maybe, but weight or mass is just stupidly useless for something like a building.
The problem with such big numbers is that it's very hard to reference them usefully at all.
I guess a percentage of all e-Waste would have been better, and that as a percentage of all waste.
Also, in the USA or globally? And why until 2030? (I'm guessing the article provides context)
3 Comments
Wxfisch@piefed.world · 8 pts · 60d
This is infuriatingly stupid, the whole point of using things like “longer than 4 football fields” is that most people at least have a solid idea how big a football field is so have a frame of reference, but who the hell understands the weight of the Empire State Building?!? That is just such a useless frame of reference. Height sure, volume maybe, but weight or mass is just stupidly useless for something like a building.
A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 59d
The problem with such big numbers is that it's very hard to reference them usefully at all.
I guess a percentage of all e-Waste would have been better, and that as a percentage of all waste.
Also, in the USA or globally? And why until 2030? (I'm guessing the article provides context)
A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 59d
Not paywalled in EU.
Archived, unfortunately without the above image, also they need to work on making the frame smaller: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/eUcNb