Submitted by eqqqxy t3_yhdp6x in dataisbeautiful
Comments
Pyrhan t1_iudcyj4 wrote
Also, what's the quality of those fits anyways?
DicksB4Chicks t1_iuh32ph wrote
Not to mention the Kuznet's curve OP is referencing turned out to be false
Adam302 t1_iudaukj wrote
There's a good chance I am a bit thick, but I have no idea how to understand this.
vacri t1_iudbjyb wrote
The richer the country, the better the air quality, except in Africa where a bad line-of-fit makes it look like it's deadly to be wealthy there.
enakcm t1_iudpd1d wrote
How to understand this: there is no or only a very weak correlation between how rich a country is and how many people die from pollution.
In other words: awareness is more important than wealth to prevent pollution deaths.
Creative_Elk_4712 t1_iugvpqi wrote
As gdp increases, in every continent (there are showed the continent curves for the expected deaths by given gdp value) the trend is that country’s citizens are less affected in a serious way by air pollution (here showed by air pollution deaths). You have the position crossed with dotted lines for the average country in the world
benthib t1_iuddmhz wrote
OP do you offer a three day course to teach how to read this???
Fiskefest t1_iuev31v wrote
Day 1 - How to ignore the fitted curves.
sault18 t1_iudn19y wrote
Need to label the USA, China and Russia. I know what bubbles these correspond to, but you absolutely need to label these major countries even if you have to remove other labels to keep the graph from getting too busy.
Kuwait data looks really faulty. They're not doing anything radically different than other Gulf States in reducing pollution deaths. More likely, they're underreporting deaths or they're more effective at shipping foreign workers out of the country once they get sick. Probably both.
Egypt is an outlier because of all the tourism income while also having atrocious air quality.
Burnrate t1_iug0ith wrote
Can you point out the US, China, and Russia for me? This graph is so confusing, the trend lines are worthless :/
Ombrynn t1_iudxrxp wrote
It's not beautiful tho. Labels are misleading (for example Switzerland is the micro red dot but feels like the giant unlabeled blue one)
The fitting is way off. there is no clear correlation between GDP and pollution.
Everything is cluttered and hard to read. The size of dots are not explained...
sleeper_must_awaken t1_iuflsfa wrote
This chart is atrocious:
- Big countries not labeled (China, US)
- GDP per capita, so why not deaths per capita per year?
- No correction for demographics (age)
- The linear regression is incorrect. It is impossible for a continent to have negative deaths). There are no standard error lines around the curve (like so)
- The chart is too verbose to tell a good story. Remove half of the information, and it improves.
- It should be the "reported death rate", because we don't know the true death rate.
- Is this deaths per year? (probably, but implied).
An informational chart would plot:
- GDP per capita (which is a terrible metric, but hey... you probably read the wikipedia page before publishing a graph, so you know what you're doing)
- vs. Deaths per capita due to outdoor pollution in a specific age-group (60-70 or sth). This is an unreliable metric, because different countries account for deaths differently. If someone smoked in a polluted area and dies of lung cancer, what would you attribute the death to?
- Remove the linear regression lines.
- Remove the bottom 20 percentile of smaller countries.
- Label only the top 20 percentile of countries or don't label at all.
- Remove the average lines.
- Perhaps also remove the size <> population of the scatter plot.
- Make 5 panels for each continent with a shared GDP axis (like so) if you want to disentangle the information.
But, most importantly, what should be the title of the story you want to tell with this chart?
85251820 t1_iudc21r wrote
Interesting. Would be nice to see Canada and USA
Tentoesinmyboots t1_iudjekg wrote
They're they're but unlabeled, in the bottom right corner.
bradklyn t1_iudl56z wrote
Switzerland is in North America, never knew…
2312family t1_iudpvu0 wrote
How is this beautiful. The sub is data is beautiful
pk10534 t1_iudtdik wrote
I think the data could be interesting were it easier to read. Not sure why Timor and Turkmenistan were deemed necessary to label but the US, China, Russia, Indonesia, etc weren’t…? That’s like what, 25-30% of the global population amongst 4 or so countries and none of them are labeled lol?
authorPGAusten t1_iue59hx wrote
Africa trend line makes 0 sense.
Grason20 t1_iugfdb9 wrote
Yep, Egypt messed the line up
FreeRadical5 t1_iudj1ge wrote
Us and Canada both not labeled.
ProLibertateCH t1_iuffhxo wrote
Excellent, this really illustrates how Capitalism SAVES LIVES!
Wealthier, classical liberal, capitalist countries are far less polluted than socialist / dictatorial ones.
Take Switzerland - GDP is based to almost 30% on industrial production, yet pollution is minimal.
This destroys the entire WEF narrative: impoverishing people will worsen whatever ecological problems there may be.
bubba-yo t1_iug5avq wrote
Deaths? US has ~10 deaths. Is that total deaths, deaths per thousand, per hundred thousand. I can't assume per capita. 10 deaths per capita is pretty fucking bad.
shark_snak t1_iudkh5w wrote
Are you implying causation? That death rate is because of air pollution? How can you possibly point cause of death solely as air pollution, and not some other cause, ex smoking. Or is this just deaths by country plotted against air pollution by country?
[deleted] t1_iudlja3 wrote
[removed]
dorejj t1_iudljib wrote
Jesus talk about cluttered data
[deleted] t1_iueegl1 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iuef50z wrote
[removed]
Creative_Elk_4712 t1_iugvjcu wrote
Considering that Italy has a huge urban population, is really densely inhabitated and has the Padan Plain high pressure smog cloak…this doesn’t even make sense to me, we are good
[deleted] t1_iugvt34 wrote
[removed]
Retnuh3k t1_iuhh4f7 wrote
Forgot the greatest country on the planet.. it’s okay..I’d be jealous too
eqqqxy OP t1_iud5lkl wrote
VALMaX1 t1_iudc7ca wrote
I mean I can't find India here. India has many pollluted cities.
DrTonyTiger t1_iud9tvj wrote
A great example of the danger of extrapolating beyond your data. All the fit lines need to stop a the highest X value or less. That would remove the rearkmable line for Africa, which shoots up beyond Egypt into fictional wealthy polluted countries.