Please, dodging taxes is the least of Shell's atrocities.

Well can't we just ban Shell from selling oil, and then get in our F150s to drive to the airport?

I'm cool with that. I also don't think it would necessarily be huge in terms of inconvenience for the average person because alternatives would pop up before long. For example, if air travel became prohibitively expensive we might actually see an expanse of passenger rail for domestic travel. It's ridiculous that it's still cheaper/more convenient to take a 45 min flight (plus the time the whole airport experience takes) vs a couple hours (or less with high speed rail) train ride. Certain plastics might also become too expensive so we might see the return to more sustainable packaging. A lot of the oil and byproduct consumption from the average person comes down to lack of choice ratger than people choosing products made from oil ober alternatives.

K that's fine

Nothing changes until the price of an electric car is less than the cost of a gas one when it comes to the vehicle cost.

A Hyundai Sonata is 35k CAD

A Hyundai IONIQ 6 is 55k CAD

Miss me with that bullshit.

Yes, but regulating pollutors requires a populace that won't accept anything less. Instead people are placated by paper straws.

idk. i got an ebike and my lifestyle didn't change a while lot. just had to get one with a trunk, uh, big basket strapped to the back.

Honestly, I believe the main roadblock is the idea that change will need to happen at all. The sad truth is that most people are fine with contributing to climate change so long as they can keep doing what they're accustomed to doing.

The only way I can see for meaningful climate action to happen is to get people on board with regulation polluters while allowing them to be ignorant to the fact that lifestyle changes will have to follow, and then when they're forced to adapt, they will. People are much better at changing when they can't afford not to than when they have the option to just keep on doing what they always have.

People are also a lot more likely to make sacrifices to keep up momentum after a win like regulating polluters; few people are going to change first when they can see a company like Shell - polluting more every day than they have in their entire lives - going unchecked. A change has to happen to give them hope that the climate can even be saved before they try to make changes themselves to save it.

No thanks, BP and Saudi Aramco already prop up the US enough.

like a mob boss

Who do you think started the first big companies?

Trains and trams are based af

I agree, I love trains too!

And regarding your other points, don't forget urban planning. Trains and urban planning go hand in hand. You can't transform transportation by trains alone if everything is suburbs and city jobs, for example.

Excellent comment!

Design towns and cities that can only be easily traversed by car.

Just to reiterate, there is something you can do about this. Lobby your local decision makers. They're not waiting around to be guilted into anything, but they are generally happy to talk to residents and are open for reasonable arguments.

(That doesn't mean local politicians are reasonable people. 90% of the ones who run things where I live are a lost case. But there are always the odd exceptions who are willing to listen and will work hard to make a difference.)

We're all responsible. I'm sure a lot of Romans used this argument when their slaves came after them during the Servile Wars. And it probably didn't go well.

American comment is American

Is it also not the fault of the 99% who vote for non-Green parties who then make the laws causing your bullet points?

Sure, you buy and drive the car, but you didn’t:

If you vote for political parties that support these policies it's on you too, with your vote you handle them your responsibility

It in fact doesn't matter much which one you buy from, they all sell the same product and the product they sell is the problem.

Yes, it's impossible to effect change as a single person so government action is needed... But the necessary consequence of that is that we also stop consuming as much fuel.

These companies are monopolies, they can't be significantly materially affected by a consumer boycott. Most of their customers are in industry anyways. Any boycott against them is more about raising awareness than achieving something, it's a diffuse form of political education.

To take on the fossil fuel industry requires having control over big levers at the top of the economy. Those levers are currently pulled, anarchically, by capital, not actual humans. Capital pulls those levers and spurns its highest level servants to get out of the way or feed it more bodies. To end this society-wide violence we must displace capital, it must not be in charge. We must be in charge.

And you base that on... a shitpost on lemmy without a source or even a damn label? It's literally bunch of rectangles.

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

I first need to hold my own legislature responsible

Don't think that's really a thing in America anymore.

It's just a vibe I get. It may have something to do with felon rapist pedophiles running the legislature.

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"

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.

Green hydrogen only works when you have more energy than needed and you're 100% renewable electricity. You could have done that with nuclear power in the 60s in theory. But solar in abundance is the only likely route it will work.

Hydrogen will never be a viable fuel and will never save the world. It leaks like hell, has a low energy density so it needs to be either highly compressed or highly refrigerated to liquify it to be even usable for something that is moving, which needs a lot of energy and induces a lot of constraints.

Basically, everywhere where electricity is a meaningful solution, hydrogen is just outclassed. Which leaves heavy industries and maybe cargo ships. The rest must either electrify, or just go.

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.

As if oil companies aren't the tip of the spear of anti-renewable propaganda and climate change denial.

Exactly. Don’t spare the governments.

in fact this is in the lead of the shell wikipedia page:

Measured by both its own emissions, and the emissions of all the fossil fuels it sells, Shell was the ninth-largest corporate producer of greenhouse gas emissions in the period 1988–2015.

Which makes the graph sort of misleading. Nationalising or abolishing shell wouldn’t solve the problem. It might help, but we need wayy wayyy wayyyy more than that.

Whoah there, give demons some slack. They aren't destroying life as we know it on a global scale just for a few extra bucks