Climate evangelicals have been trying to preach their message for, what, half a century? Do you really think they have the time, or even the need, to respond to an article that basically says: "hey fossil fuel companies.... you make fossil fuel. how do you feel about that?"
Aka, literally 99+% of climate scientists, and a vast majority of people across the world.
And the message is more like: "Hey fossil fuel companies... you're killing the potential of this planet. Do you even have the decency to try and defend yourself?"
> Half of the world’s climate-heating carbon emissions come from the fossil fuels produced by just 36 companies, analysis has revealed.
Seems like an important distinction from the headline, because the issue isn't that 36 companies are just randomly blowing Carbon into the atmosphere, it's the fuels they extract, refine and ship that are the cause. The fuel we use in our cars, to heat homes, to run industry.
We SHOULD be making a transition over to renewables and nuclear, but to a large degree we haven't, so a demand exists for fossil fuels. I'm not saying that these companies are innocent, far from it, they've spent decades trying to uphold the untenable status quo, but this kind of "Oh it's an external threat only" article is really pointless.
Doubly true when the top 5 on the list (by far) are state owned, with only Aramco having any link to the West and The Guardian's audience.
Something tells me that Chinese, Indian, and Iranian state energy companies don't really care about impressing a Western audience with their "eco credentials.
But I should stop using my wood-stove because I'm "part of the problem" when Taylor Swift and John Kerry are flying private jets on a weekly basis... right.
Climate is an issue but this is why it's hilarious that I'm supposed to change my life to help "fix" this.
There is an issue of the time scales involved, after all if you take it far enough oil and gas are just undoing what geological epochs did, and will do again.
Personally though no I don't think a wood burning stove is an issue, other than the raised cancer risk for the owner/operator, and that isn't my problem.
8 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 31.9 ms ] threadThey're not even concerned enough to lie to us. Must be feeling pretty untouchable.
Aka, literally 99+% of climate scientists, and a vast majority of people across the world.
And the message is more like: "Hey fossil fuel companies... you're killing the potential of this planet. Do you even have the decency to try and defend yourself?"
Seems like an important distinction from the headline, because the issue isn't that 36 companies are just randomly blowing Carbon into the atmosphere, it's the fuels they extract, refine and ship that are the cause. The fuel we use in our cars, to heat homes, to run industry.
We SHOULD be making a transition over to renewables and nuclear, but to a large degree we haven't, so a demand exists for fossil fuels. I'm not saying that these companies are innocent, far from it, they've spent decades trying to uphold the untenable status quo, but this kind of "Oh it's an external threat only" article is really pointless.
Doubly true when the top 5 on the list (by far) are state owned, with only Aramco having any link to the West and The Guardian's audience.
Something tells me that Chinese, Indian, and Iranian state energy companies don't really care about impressing a Western audience with their "eco credentials.
Climate is an issue but this is why it's hilarious that I'm supposed to change my life to help "fix" this.
Personally though no I don't think a wood burning stove is an issue, other than the raised cancer risk for the owner/operator, and that isn't my problem.