The author of the linked article argues that achieving sustainability will only be feasible if rich countries significantly reduce their environmental impact by 40-50%. However, dubbing such a reduction as a path to a "good life" appears ironic. The article's Table 1 outlines individual thresholds, such as a carbon footprint limit of 1.6 tonnes per person per year.
This seemingly meager value becomes starkly evident when considering that individuals with a Gulfstream G100 private jet can surpass this limit in under an hour, and those driving a Lamborghini Aventador emitting 464g CO2/km will exceed it after several hours. It is evident that those profiting from high-emission luxury items are likely resistant to the notion of emission limits, possibly attributing them to a perceived envy-driven conspiracy by poor individuals aimed at restricting the rich from enjoying their opulent lifestyle.
Table 1 establishes a nutritional threshold of 2700 calories per person per day. This benchmark prompts scrutiny of the extravagant diet of world champion Michael Phelps, who is renowned for his daily intake of 12,000 calories, which I criticized in December 2018, deserving the label of "environmental offender" akin to the individuals who participate in this pornographic competition https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/08/youtube-trend-extreme-food-challenges-encourages-binge-eating/
