cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/1097575
You must log in or register to comment.
- brachiosaurus@mander.xyzEnglish3 months
If you vote for parties that support these corporations it’s on you too.
- pyre@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
yeah but you make sure you don’t fart a lot and keep it in as much as possible
- rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish3 months
Oligarchs. People own Shell, they make demands. Those shareholders demand profits over all else. Those companies are just constructs we’ve made to organize making money. Not to say you can’t go after them… well, you can’t because they own the governments… but you get my point
- tmr9999@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I’m not sure about the data sources for this image but from some quick research it looks like this includes scope 3 (end user emissions) for shell and chevron by not the others. The data realistically looks a bit more like this:
🇸🇦 Saudi Aramco: ~2.0 Billion metric tons (Estimated; excludes Scope 3 from official tracking) 🇬🇧 Shell: ~1.1 Billion metric tons 🇺🇸 ExxonMobil: ~813 Million metric tons 🇺🇸 Chevron: ~600 to 780 Million metric tons (Varies by accounting method) 🇬🇧 BP: ~400 Million metric tons
Context: For all these companies, Scope 3 makes up 85% to 95% of their total climate impact. This is why state-owned giants like Aramco and US majors like Exxon/Chevron focus their climate targets almost entirely on their own drilling operations (Scope 1 & 2) while excluding the footprint of the products they sell.
In any case this is pretty bad and we are probably gonners.
- blarghly@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I still feel like these numbers are not appropriately representative… iirc, the vast majority of world oil supplies come from nationalized oil companies, which keep the lions share of the profits of oil production as a source of national revenue. So assuming I havent been misled, my best guess is that the private firms are contracted for extraction and refinement, and so the total carbon footprint gets lumped together under them, rather than being split between the national governments who contract them
3 monthsBut someone told me it was my neighbors who are the evil polluters? This is telling me it’s rich people. That makes no sense. I want to blame my neighbors, not rich people!
- 3 months
There are a lot of “who gives them the money” posts here - and on a basic level they’re right.
But there’s also the part where these companies were spearheading climate research initially - and instead of trying to pivot into renewable energy they doubled down on oil, muddied the waters in discussions by first denying global warming and then when that didn’t work out anymore, emphasizing scientific uncertainty, lobbied against environmental regulations, and shifted blame to the individual.
- blarghly@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I don’t think anyone disagrees with this. But the above meme always irks me, because it implies that if only those mean ol’ corporations would just stop it, all us good people could stop climate change and get back to driving our F150s in peace.
- Tollana1234567@lemmy.todayEnglish3 months
they also used more subversive tactics, like funding certain companies, into convincing peopel to buy thier eco friendly products, or those “protesters that have been defacing public property”
- HugeNerd@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Spoiler alert: if we weren’t 8 billion and fertilized our crops with fossil fuels, then we wouldn’t need that much fossil energy…
Yes, it’s you. It’s me. It’s your 5 kids. The oil didn’t pump itself out of the ground and set itself on fire for fun.
It’s your plane trip, it’s your military, it’s your proxy wars.
- REDACTED@infosec.pubEnglish3 months
Whenever I see posts like this, I really don’t understand if people really think they produce oil/gas/fuel/food packaging, etc. for themselves.
If someone offers a money for a product, there will be someone else willing to sell it to you. You are the consumer.
Think of it like this - a electricity company generates electricity, as much as it’s needed for current demand. I’m the final consumer, the demander, the reason infrastructure exists. And I shall be happy burning my RTX 5080 while looking into ACs to cool the room from that PC at the same time, hitting 2kW usage just so I can do nothing and game, because who cares. I tried living green, but when you see MFs producing more footprint in their shitty trucks in a day than you do in a month using Ebike, and people still decide to blame some placeholder instead of our own society and way of living, then it’s quite clear nothing will change and it’s a lost cause.
- REDACTED@infosec.pubEnglish3 months
You’re confused.
The money comes from you. I welcome you to no longer use a car and walk to the job. Poof, suddenly their profit falls. Multiply that by a society, and suddenly much of these firms can no longer exist.
The question has always been about how much humans are willing to sacrifice to save the earth, and the answer has pretty much always been “best I can do is blame a placeholder (some CEO/company, doesn’t matter which one, because it’s just demand from society and there will always be new companies as long as there is demand from you and me) and assume it’s 100% their fault”
Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t really an individual problem, it’s how society/humans work. We’d vote for someone who speaks against oil, but hang them as soon as the oil price goes above 5$
- 3 months
I don’t own a gasoline car you fool
I want the price of oil to be $2028 a gallon
- blarghly@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
The products you buy were made in factories powered by fossil fuels, shipped across oceans in fossil fuel powered ships, and arrive at the shop in fossil fuel powered trucks. The food you eat is fertilized with fossil fuels, and the industrial growing, processing, and packaging process puts carbon into the atmosphere. The streets you walk on are made from concrete, which releases carbon into the atmosphere from the chemical process used to synthesize it. And even if you live some magical life where you can avoid personally paying the cost of all of these things, the same is not true of everyone else, who needs to drive cars to work on asphalt highways, heat their homes with wood/propane/ng stoves, eats industrially produced food, and have all this economic activity protected via a fossil fuel powered military. And an increased price of carbon means that their lives cost more, which means they need higher wages, which means everything they produce that you might buy also gets more expensive.
I don’t disagree with you that gas prices should be higher. In fact, I think the only way to get from here to there is to appropriately price carbon. But to act like there is no potential for hardship among average people - that there arent legitimate challenges to weening off the carbon-heavy economy we are used to - is disingenuous at best
- REDACTED@infosec.pubEnglish3 months
Right, but why are you ready to live green when 8 out of 10 people would take the cheaper oil that you didn’t buy? Just keep doing whatever you like, we don’t matter on the grand scheme of things.
- 3 months
Remember, their families got rich by fucking our families over.
We need to stop pretending they’re on our side because they are our enemies.
- humanspiral@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
take their money
absolutely essential. Oil, weapons, media, zionists destroy election integrity through treasonous fraud. They all collude and support each other to boot. When SCC says money is speach, money is fraud, treason, and oppression. Take it away from the traitorous oppressors.
Wait but I always say “Thanks ExxonMobil” sarcastically but this looks like I should be thanking Shell?
And God said “LET CORPORATIONS DESTROY THE PLANET AND ERADICATE ALL LIFE”.
Guess this is the modern alternative to the flood.
