114
Half of world’s CO2 emissions come from just 32 fossil fuel firms, study shows | Critics accuse leading firms of sabotaging climate action but say data increasingly being used to hold them to account (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/climate@slrpnk.net
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I will note that these are scope 3 emissions, so it includes the emissions associated with fossil fuels extracted by these firms and burned by others, as well as those from electrical generation when end consumers use the electricity.

These are Scope 3 Category 11 emissions, corresponding to "use of sold products", however this has been modified to quantify emissions from each fossil fuel company’s net production of oil, gas, or coal as opposed to sold products.

all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

As you noted yourself, this is scope 3 emissions, meaning that if I buy a ton of coal and put on fire in my garden the associated emission will be counted toward the company which extracted it.

Such accounting is useful to understand which company produce highly polluting stuff but saying that the emission come from them is highly misleading. Using this way to count emission I'm never responsible for any emission whether it is burning coal for fun, taking the plane every morning or eating exclusively beef. What it says to people is basically that they have no responsibility and shouldn't make any change.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago*

    What it says to people is basically that they have no responsibility and shouldn’t make any change.

    There's always been a sort of false dichotomy about this. On the one hand there's this idea that climate change can be solved by individual consumer choices and personal responsibility. On the other there's the idea that the average person can continue on with their life exactly as before if we just fix things "behind the scenes".

    IMO the reality is that climate change mitigation requires systemic top-down change, but that change is going to affect people's lives. In some ways for the better and some ways for the worse. The kind of "individual choices" we need people to make is to choose not to throw a hissy fit when their local government removes a car lane.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    If you drive a car that burns fossil fuels than you're responsible for the emissions. But the company selling you the petrol and the manufacturer of the car are also responsible. They are lobbying the governments of the world so that they can continue selling you petrol and cars with internal combustion engines instead of investing in greener technologies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Yeah, this is my issue with the stats like this that come out. Individually our impact is small, but add up 8 billion people and that gets monumentally larger. While companies definitely need to be held accountable for their carbon output, it will also take collective effort of individuals. We're not off the hook either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 6 points 9 months ago

    'Hold them to account' makes it sound like they at least had to own up and honestly admit it. Maybe they have, while simultaneously funding climate denialism, us politicians for denial, and otherwise funding campaigns to deny harm from hosts of pollutants, many systematic at this point, poisoning everything.

    Insect populations are down 90 pc since the 90s, something is fundamentally wrong, they know their parts in it, and pay to make sure we do not know. Poisoning everyone to save a dollar.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Anyone got a list of them in the US just asking incase they invade

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • 6 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 27 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

    So when idiots say that there's no point doing anything in your country because China, this may help to remind them which major polluters are owned or based in your country. For example, BP is the 8th-largest emitter, Shell is the 9th and both are based in the UK, so UK regulators could absolutely help clean them up and make a massive difference.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    it's a stupid metric tbh, the fuel is just what goes into (coal/gas) power plants, cars and planes to make them move, if you reduce the demand for those things naturally the demand for coal/gas/oil etc will go down

    so UK regulators could absolutely help clean them up and make a massive difference.

    They are :)

    The government announced that the plan, published on Wednesday, will focus on funding solar panels, heat pumps and batteries for households across the UK via low-interest loans and grants.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgj7me00p0o

    All of these reduce demand for coal and gas, they also make having an EV more viable as cheaper power prices make running an EV even cheaper than it already is

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 19 points 9 months ago

    Yeah, turns out most of our CO2 emissions comes from fossil fuels which power most of our heating, manufacturing and transport, as well as form the foundational material for most products.

    Who could have guessed that the things we do the most are the things that consume the most energy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 10 points 9 months ago

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •