> this article reads almost like people are dying, arguing "consequences can be far-reaching, affecting policy decisions that impact real people". what are those consequences?
The obvious part would be wrong calculation of emission-trapping. The article mentions co2 quite often. This could mean wrong claims of health-benefits for living areas, or leading to wrong calculations around climate change.
The obvious part would be wrong calculation of emission-trapping. The article mentions co2 quite often. This could mean wrong claims of health-benefits for living areas, or leading to wrong calculations around climate change.