My takeaway as always is that clearly the single most impactful thing most people can do is not have children, or have fewer children. Unless you're a billionaire, nothing in your life with have close to the same impact as not reproducing.

I would however also point out that simply divided total emissions reductions needed vs all humans is misleading. The average Nigerian emits FAR less CO2 than the average Indian. The average Indian emits less than the average Chinese person, who emits less than the average American.

If we look at per country per capita emissions [1], we can see that Africa, South America and Asia (excluding China and India) have current emissions below the 2C warming. So yes, they don't need to reduce anything at the country level - simply not increase.

North America and Europe on the other hand...

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?t... Scroll all the way down

Yup. Stop reproducing below replacement rate. Embrace GMOs. Consume less. That's the only viable path we have.

Lol after the west and you specifically have enjoyed a life of decadent and gluttoness consumption? Yeah not gonna happen buddy. Africa will consume what it wants to consume and fuck you and your moralizing western bullshit

> [2] The OP's OurWorldInData graph screenshot says beef emissions are 60, but the actual page says 99. Same chart. I don't understand. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/food-emissions-supply-cha... I used 60 in the calculation above.

The chart I used does not include losses in the supply chain. The difference between both charts is further explained here: https://ourworldindata.org/faqs-environmental-impacts-food