But 58 million Americans emit as much as shell
this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
424 points (100.0% liked)
196
666 readers
20 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That just means we have to get rid of 58 million Americans to balance it out!
load more comments
(2 replies)
Daily reminder that carbon footprint is a myth created by big oil
addendum: this is not an excuse to do nothing on a personal level. you are just as bad as the corporations if you act carelessly like you can’t help change anything. go vegan
Whenever I say this I get gang downvoted by people on this site.
What most fail to understand is they are contributing to the emissions of shell and other major contributors to global warming by purchasing or using anything which relates to their products.
The wealthy humans can afford to avoid these products, but they cop out. Personally I've bought a second hand electric car and gone vegan over the last 18 months. It's more expensive than not changing my car but I could afford it and now I don't support the oil industry at all. Next on my list is my natural gas house boiler.
I've had people say 4 return flights a year isn't many flights and isn't a factor to climate change, especially compared to businesses which fly employees everywhere. Madness
You guys know we buy shell products right?
You know shell along with a handful of other companies actively block any other option for us, and hold us captive to their exploitation, right? 🙄
Yeah I'm sure shell and co really forced the sale of 750k F-series trucks last year, right?
Objectively false/hyperbolic statement. Shell haven't stopped me buying a second hand electric car and a heat pump for my property.
If you're wealthy you can avoid shell
Jfc, it's distressing to see how many people buy in to the personal responsibility propaganda and are actively not only licking the boot that's on all our necks, but doing the corporations' dirty work for them, gleefully, ignoring the entire picture (the deliberate spending of many trillions, and holding governments in their pockets to keep us dependant on oil and having no viable alternative) except the tiny little fragment they're comfortable confronting - other individuals. It's both gross and concerning.
Joke's on you: I plan to live at least 58 million years.
You better become vegan then.
He already is, that's why he said he is going to live that long
idk if ill make it that long, but ill try i guess
This is a false dichotomy, the way you shutdown O&G is through political action, making personal choices to limit your personal carbon output is a political action. It directly hurts O&G and directly helps the alternatives.
Making a personal choice helps drive political will which changes how people make personal decisions which drives political will. Arguing about which step to bootstrap the process seems pointless. If it's easier for you to show up at Tuesday at 11am to city council meetings and yell for more bus routes do that. If it's easier to increase your commute 20minutes and drive up ridership to give ammo to the council people, do that. If it's easier to drop a big sum of money to lobby the government do that. Just do whatever you can that helps.
We are all drops of rain in an ocean, but without the rain the ocean would run dry.
You fell into the trap that this post is exposing. Of course personal action matters, everyone knows it and there's no chance we'll forget it, but the heavy polluting companies want to focus our attention on that alone, to keep it off of themselves. Please don't assist them in doing so.
I think this is the same carbon emissions : just split differently. Shell consumers are the very same citizens. Also 16tons is huge, even compared to other developed countries in Europe for example (almost twice as much !)
No they didn't. They clearly stated that we need to take political action which is the only way to force the companies to align with our goals. Policies that drastic need a lot of backup in the society that legitimises these policies, which is what they meant by "we are all raindrops"
I am not supporting shell here, just asking a question.
If I am correct in assuming that shell produces 928 million tons (58,000,000 * 16) that means if the average American reduced their CO2 output from 16 down to ~13.3 then that would offset the total output of shell?
Is that amount of reduction even possible for the average American without giving up too much?
Obviously every company should do everything they can do lower emissions, but per person changes can have effect too. The problem is the vast majority of the 340 million Americans simply don’t care.
load more comments
(1 replies)
An average U.K. citizen emits 5 tonnes. Get in gear Americans!!
Forbid whatever shell is selling. Only except might be is if it saves life and there is no good alternative. Wait - did I just solve climate change?
They effectively sell all of our fuel. I'm doing my best to avoid them but I'm in a fortunate position where I'm wealthy enough to use the alternatives which are 20% or so more money.
I hope more do the same, then shell will die
Can't kill a megacorp like that this easily, they have ample time to invest their ill-gotten earnings elsewhere even in the most optimistic scenario. Most energy companies are branching out into renewables nowadays.
That's no excuse to not contribute towards greener alternatives
It's not an excuse, it's about managing expectations. Having unrealistic expectations is dangerous for any movement.
This comparison makes no sense at all. But true, tax the rich, and imprison people profiting on the lifes of others