>The metric puts a price tag on the damages created by each metric ton of greenhouse gas emissions. In all natural resource fields, non-use values for resources are assigned a cost. That can include things like watershed stability, wildlife habitat protection, or soil stability. They pretend it should include "intrinsic" values, which can simply be the satisfaction someone somewhere derives from just knowing that the resource is being left unused. They will assign a $ value to that intrinsic non-use and then use that to weight in the cost/benefit analysis for determining at the NEPA level if a resource can or should be managed. So I'm certain that a large part of this fantasy emissions cost calculation is just the perceived cost rated by retards who don't even know how to start a gas engine and who will never own a car because the big city takes care of them.