- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
You must log in or register to comment.
I’m all for free speech, but we need to instate stricter rules and regulations for the press. Before Reagan came around, the press was federally funded, now look at the hellscape he has created
Reminder that 100% of those 100 corporations are fuel producers, and the 71% figure is based on counting all emissions from all the fuel they produce as theirs.
This take is as smooth brained as blaming gun violence on the largest firearm manufacturers.
Exactly. These companies thrive because you give them money.
Want to hurt corporations? Stop driving everywhere. Stop buying a new phone every second year. If you insist on buying clothes as a recreational activity, restrict yourself to vintage and give the shit you never wear away to charity. If you have to, drive a used car for 20 years rather than buying a new EV every fifth one. Buy locally. Cut down on meat. That’ll stick it to 'em.
No, This take is 100% correct but should ALSO include the %ages of fuel USED BY END USERS and explain 100% of what what the producers OUTRIGHT WASTE in bringing them that needed fuel.
Yeah. It’s sexier to live with fossil fuels than without, so that’s what we do.
If it was sexier to forego fossil fuels, that’s what we would be doing.
We collectively decided to use up the world’s stock of phosphorus (a lot of which had been in fossil fuels apparently?) and have a population boom. I don’t know what the next century or two will look like, but I’m not optimistic.
The biggest impact you can have is reducing your consumption of goods. Making purchases last longer, skipping upgrade cycles, and in general having less.
Less manufacturing, less packaging, less shipping, less employees making goods commuting to work etc etc. However; that doesn’t really fit in with our current global economic survival strategy. Yes, less red meat is very important too, for the world as a whole.
I’m of the mind set of every bit helps, but it’s absurd the burden is always laid upon the individual and not those actively profiting from the destruction of the environment.
You are missing the most important thing you can do, vote! At least if you are living in a country with a working democracy. Show those in power that this is an important topic to their constituency. Sure, personal decisions can make a small difference, but a lot of the big issues are systemic and need political power to change.
Yes exactly, people fail to realise that the lifestyle us people in western countries live is completely unsustainable and if we want to even have a shred of hope against climate change everyone needs to drastically change the way they live in ways like only taking a plane once a year, only eating meat once a week keeping your phone for 5 years etc. This all ofcourse also includes the super rich who fly their private jets everyday. Our luxurious lifestyle is not possible to live without causing climate change.
I pretty much stopped driving entirely. I ride my bike, walk, or take the bus whenever I can. I’m probably going to sell my car. Been eating less red meat too but I need to cut it out entirely. Sucks because I love a good steak but it’s not worth the damage.
That is excellent, in Florida, public transit is so poor taking a bus is literally not even a viable option. It can take hours to get even 15 miles away lol. I do WFH frequently now which has reduced my commute to only a couple days per week.
Reduction is a really impactful thing to do for the reasons you’ve outlined, though “a vegan diet is probably the single biggest way to reduce your impact on planet Earth, not just greenhouse gases, but global acidification, eutrophication, land use and water use”, according to the scientists behind the most comprehensive analysis to date comparing the impact of food production. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325532198_Reducing_food’s_environmental_impacts_through_producers_and_consumers
I do vote… I am also in the U.S. where many people are brainwashed.
We need to stop pretending these companies exist in a void and are polluting for the sake of polluting. They are selling goods, we are buying them.
And most people would be happy with them switching to more green production methods.
Like Shell, yes we need power so stopping oil production all at once is a bad idea. But they’ve known about climate change for 40+ years. And instead of adapting to green energy, they campaigned and scare mongered against it.
It’s much easier to regulate 100 companies than 8 billion people.
Yes we need to regulate industries. But you can regulate the meat industry all you want, as long as we consume that much meat it will be a problem.
The “Ok but companies…” people throw around every time we talk about personal responsability is only used to ignore that responsability. And I think meat consumption is the best example because everyone can stop eating meat. It’s cheaper and does not require any particular effort.
Tbh, like most changes in history. Government’s need to regulate it. The smoking bans, the little recycling laws we have now, emission targets/laws.
Certain industries can change to reduce emissions, others, like meat, will eventually get outright banned and it’s the only real way we’ll ever reduce meat consumption.
Every article on climate change should include the top companies and individuals contributing to carbon pollution.
And the names and addresses of their CEOs
For those saying that this is the fault of corporations yes true, but the corporations are destroying the planet based on filling the consumers demands. Companies don’t exist for the sole purpose of destroying the planet. If less people ate beef for example, less cows would need to be raised and this would result in less greenhouse gases.
Consume less and regulate environment protections is the answer.
True, but we also have a gigantic advertising industry to manipulate people into buying things they don’t really want. Some items have also become mandatory like a form of internet access (not that I’m complaining about that one) and in the USA and much of the UK cars as well.
What’s so sad is that those corporations are just pumping out waste and pollution for the fun of it, and not because they are providing goods and services that are very important for us to continue living the way we are comfortable living.
…
They’re pumping out waste and pollution for the profit. We’re the ones throwing money at them for the fun of it.
And what is Tyson Foods gonna do when I stop eating their chicken? Lobby for mandatory forced feeding of chicken to every vegetarian?
What are subsidies Alex?
Market their chicken harder to all the other people who don’t stop eating their chicken. Net result: no change in the amount of chicken eaten.
Uhh… Those kinds of people don’t need more marketing to eat more chicken.
Marketing will increase demand no matter what, and it works on all sorts of people, not just “those kinds.”
I’m sorry, but you’re wrong.
While I’m not claiming the respondent is wrong, can I get a citation for this data so I know who to try to work with to help reduce their emissions?
From a study done back in 2017. It has probably gotten even worse since then, but that’s the most recent one I found.
Problem is the wording in the article has some words/phrases which do a lot of heavy lifting, like “traced back”; from the tweet, I would have thought the report would say the produced the emissions.
It’s real data but it’s kind of a weird methodology. Like oil companies like Chevron are in the top 10 based on all the cars that use their gas.
Not to say the sentiment in this meme is wrong at all, just that this specific study is weird.
Like oil companies like Chevron are in the top 10 based on all the cars that use their gas.
That’s not really different than other companies, though, is it? Every company on the planet only produces carbon emissions in the effort to gain a profit in some way, through shipping, farming, etc. If we’re going to hold companies accountable for things like shipping emissions and waste, gas companies shouldn’t get a pass just because their product is the thing making the emissions.
What does holding corporations accountable look like if not refusing to give them our money while advocating for regulation?
They pollute to make money on individuals buying their products and services.
Realistically, fines or other regulations that has the effect of increasing their costs. The way it should work is that this would increase costs to consumers, who then buy less or buy from a competitor who doesn’t pollute as much. But too many people think that any regulation whatsoever is communism and scream whenever anything like that is talked about so nothing ever gets done. And also the politicians are bought.
