[–] 1 point 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

That's a lot of deflection and minimization of the issue. It's WAY more than 91,000. Give the value of a human life. I dare you. Only then can you make an argument as to what is cost effective and what is not. BTW, throwing in the complete BS about cell phone towers makes you look like a complete buffoon.

Edit: Since you did no research other than asking AI how many people are killed/year by fossil fuels (and immediately went for the lowest estimate lol), I went ahead and did the work for you. AI gives the statistical value of a human life in the US between $13.1 million-$13.7 million. Multiple that by a few hundred thousand lives PER YEAR, and it makes your argument that "it would cost too much" pretty childish. Most Americans have been convinced by their corporate overlords (which includes the fossil fuel industry) that they don't deserve any rights, and you are a perfect example. Be better.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 23 hours ago

    Many many separate studies in the medical literature have shown that burning fossil fuels kills more than 250,000 people per year in the US alone. Air quality indoors and outdoors is a huge contributor to heart disease (#1 killer worldwide), lung disease, cancer, etc. Are you a smoker? Because having a gas stove is the equivalent to having a permanent smoker sitting at your kitchen table from a benzene (carcinogen) exposure perspective.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

    Burning fossil fuels kills more than 250,000 people a year in the US. We know gas stoves contribute to that number by releasing measurable benzene (a known carcinogen). Please, tell us the cost of a human life. So that you can justify your comment that "it'd be silly to transition to electric."

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›