• li10@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, does it really take into account that Shell emit that much providing a product for people?

      It’s how I feel when people blame Chinese warehouses for emissions. They’re making the stuff for you, you’re the ones buying it and by extension creating the emissions…

      We need to pressure companies to protect the environment, but the best thing we can really do is reduce consumption.

      • Thorry84@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed, especially western countries that have their CO2 targets, then barely make them and shout at countries like China for having big emissions. Yeah no shit, if you outsource all your manufacturing to China then you don’t have any emissions at home, because the factory isn’t there, it’s in China. Same thing with health and safety regulations, child labor etc. Look at us being all high and mighty, no children working here (except the US, we don’t talk about that), we have proper health and safety regulations. Boo China why are you like this? Oh right, we made you this way.

        And why did all the factories move to China? Capitalism…

      • reev@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Look the important thing is always that it’s someone else’s fault and if I were to change my ways it wouldn’t make a difference anyway so let’s just all keep doing what we’re doing.

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      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? 🙄

      • relic_@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I’m sure shell and co really forced the sale of 750k F-series trucks last year, right?

      • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

  • FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

  • saigot@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

      • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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”

      • alci@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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 !)

  • ji17br@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just look what happened when lockdown gave the natural world a chance to breathe.

      We COULD offset a fucktonne of CO2 if we changed our lifestyle.

      But do you remember HOW FUCKDAMN HARD half the population fought against that literally while their grandparents were dying in agony?

      Keep that in mind when you consider any monolithic action of altruism.

      Can we stop global warning with radical changes to our consumption?

      Absolutely yes.

      Will it happen?

      Not without direct government action.

  • capital@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a bit like saying “you think individuals consume a lot of food? Look at restaurants!”

  • Mio@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

  • Pantherina@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This comparison makes no sense at all. But true, tax the rich, and imprison people profiting on the lifes of others