|
I think Dadhawk was thinking that China might not just have urban, suburban and rural lifestyles, but that there was dual standard of livings there, where there are many people living in rural areas at lower standards, which could have less carbon footprint. Unlike people living in rural areas in the US, in China they probably don’t receive packages, have a car, have electricity, etc. I believe this is true of many countries like India too, but it might be even more polar for China. I don’t know. It is probably what Dadhawk was thinking. Outside of some inefficiencies and use of wood for cooking and heating, I tend to think an agrarian lifestyle would have a much smaller carbon footprint.
In general, I agree with all your points.
|