Cool, turn them off
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
189 points (97.5% liked)
Interesting Global News
2607 readers
360 users here now
What is global news?
Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media posts
Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
- !legalnews@lemmy.zip - International and local legal news.
- !technology@lemmy.zip - Technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
- !interestingshare@lemmy.zip - Interesting articles, projects, and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.
- !europe@feddit.org - News and information from Europe.
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well yes, and we millions buy from them.
We need to do both: us individually turning away from their products AND regulate them into changing/closing.
It’s easier to change 57 companies than it is to change 8 billion people.
it's a bit of a circular reference though, right?
Yeah those 57 cause 80% of CO2... but it's because they're gas/oil/coal companies and most of our houses and cars run off those. So we DO need to also change the end user.
The end user doesn’t care if their house is warmed by a gas furnace or an electric heat pump, so long as their house is warm and it’s affordable.
Those 57 companies are the ones that don’t want to change and they lobby, bribe, lie, cheat and steal to keep their hold on the market.
Those 57 companies are both the root cause of the problem and the easiest thing to change.
Yes but you still need to implement that change. You have to change millions of people's houses to switch their type of heating And replace cars, etc It will require huge changes for individuals, you can't just turn off the big oil companies as nice as it would be to have a simple fix
Oil companies are the reason we haven’t already made the change to electric transportation and renewable energy decades ago.
It could have already happened if it wasn’t for these companies trying to prevent it.
That isn't exactly related to what we're taking about. I'm not saying stopping the use of oil is bad, I'm saying it requires changes for the individual
Yes oil companies have lobbied, you also have people in industry that aren't going to vote to remove their own jobs either. Makes it tricky. I don't think we should have allowed companies to get away with this btw but historically I'm not sure public support would be there
You can’t magically change heating source for the whole affected households though. And the end user will definitely care in case of retrofit with the impact of the changeS needed. Plus costs unless you also magically address that but electricity is still very expensive.
During this period, the biggest investor-owned contributor to emissions was ExxonMobil of the United States, which was linked to 3.6 gigatonnes of CO2 over seven years, or 1.4% of the global total. Close behind were Shell, BP, Chevron and TotalEnergies, each of which was associated with at least 1% of global emissions.
In this long-term analysis, Chinese state coal production accounts for 14% of historic global C02, the biggest share by far in the database. This is more than double the proportion of the former Soviet Union, which is in second place, and more than three times higher than that of Saudi Aramco, which is in third.
Then comes the big US companies – Chevron (3%) and ExxonMobil (2.8%), followed by Russian’s Gazprom and the National Iranian Oil Company. After that are two investor-owned European firms: BP and Shell (each with more than 2%) and then Coal India.
The report is interesting but also a bit misleading. It includes all emissions from a product as being from the company that made it. So you buy a car and drive it around for 100 000km and the pollution from that driving is attributed to the company.
This point seems lost on most when they make their plastic straw complaints, it really speaks more towards there being too many monopolies.