• TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It makes sense with the context in the article, but “triples that of 650 million” is a very strange way to say “almost 2 billion”.

    • inbn@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Also funny that the other big number, 1.3 billion, is literally double 650 million. Maybe they split it it up because the numbers are tied to specific geographic areas with specific water/energy quantities but yeah it does not read very well