Live data from Hacker News

Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

theguardian.com

101–110 of 285 posts

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#101

Genuine question to all the anti "Big Oil" commenters here: what's your alternative? Let's imagine an alternate history where oil companies hadn't fought against climate change science. What does that alternate universe look like? We have known for years that climate change is real, and yet the vast majority of people simply won't actually change their consumption when push comes to shove. This is the largest, most s…

* Oil, at minimum, gets much more expensive, more quickly. * Renewable energy develops more quickly because see the first bullet point * Nuclear doesn't die

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#102
post #8

The Guardian coined the headline "Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed" to blame big oil for our collective greed.

Thank you. I recently had a conversation with someone about Canadian Federal climate policies and I found it very interesting that they seemed to think consumers should bear no sacrifice to solve the climate issue. The two most popular parties have plans aiming to reduce emissions. The Liberal party has implemented a progressive and revenue neutral carbon tax, and the Conservatives have a regulatory approach that see…

I think this may be Is vs. Ought.

Realistically and politically, people will not bear any significant sacrifice to solve CO2 emissions. They just won't. They won't do it.

You can say that they ought to as much as you please. You can say that they need to. But they still won't. You aren't going to scold them into being different. You aren't going to lecture them into being different. And you aren't going to use politics to force them to be different, because they vote, and all the politicians know they vote.

For us to get anywhere on CO2, the non-CO2 path has to be better and/or less expensive. That's it. In the real world, with the humans that we have, anything else isn't going to get any traction.

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#103

Big oil is big because billions of people rely on hydrocarbons for transport, heating their homes, electricity, and many other things. Demonizing "Big Oil" is a way to evade the fact that people are not willing to pay large amounts to stop the world from warming a few degrees.

Per TFA and many other sources, "Big Oil" (and many other industries) lobby and market hard to make sure that people misunderstand climate change and lack access to the information required to make climate-friendly purchasing decisions. Your comment is peak victim blaming.

Obviously not true. People have known about climate change for many decades. Every countries media discusses it regularly. Scientists have published countless thousands of open papers about it. You act like we just found out about global warming last week

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#104

People act like oil companies are the ones burning oil. They’re just responding to demand. We need to make oil less competitive, with better alternatives. No point or even value in demonizing these companies — the whole world is complicit.

> People act like oil companies are the ones burning oil. They’re just responding to demand. No, they’re not. > We need to make oil less competitive, with better alternatives. Like tobacco companies, oil companies have actively lied and lobbied to maintain demand and obstruct coordinated effort of exactly the kind you describe as necessary. They are not passive actors simply responding to demand as they find it.

> Like tobacco companies, oil companies have actively lied and lobbied to maintain demand and obstruct coordinated effort of exactly the kind you describe as necessary. They are not passive actors simply responding to demand as they find it.

These really aren't very similar. Big Tobacco's lies were the only thing propping up the tobacco industry. As soon as the truth became clear, their industry was absolutely crushed. The truth about climate change has been clear for decades, but unlike the situation with tobacco, the demand for Oil & Gas keeps on growing[0]. This is because, unlike tobacco, Oil & Gas is absolutely indispensable--especially for developing countries.

Lying about climate change was a terrible thing, and it cost us precious time. But we still need them to keep the lights on, and pretending that the act of producing Oil & Gas today--when it is literally a hard requirement to keep the lights on around the world-- is somehow pernicious, is just silliness. The world is stressful enough without all the outrage theatre.

[0] https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anyone doubts that they are greed-driven, just ask. They don't hide it. They have a legal obligation to pursue profits for shareholders. This is their fiduciary duty. And they are like this because their consumers are like this. If people weren't so "greedy" demanding hydrocarbons at rock bottom prices, and instead wanted to pay a premium for solar powered EVs, well then hell believe me they would pursue those b…

Do they also have a legal obligation to lie and fund disinformation?

Complete strawman. I never said this.

Oil companies/execs should be held accountable for misdeeds.

But that is a tiny fraction of the problem facing us. Let's say they came out decades ago and said "hey, there's probably going to be some repercussions for using our products" ... do you really think that would have changed anything?

We know right now what needs to be done. And yet Biden is running around pleading with OPEC to increase production to bring gasoline prices down. Why? Because people want cheap hydrocarbons, no matter how many downvotes you throw at me.

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#106
post #17

I love how people who drive cars, fly on planes, use plastic, get goods delivered by truck, etc etc, act like oil companies just pump oil out of the ground for fun then light it on fire. The mental gymnastics are impressive.

Big changes need government intervention. The government needs to take away the option to run cars, trucks, etc on gasoline, and restrict flights that don't use renewable energy (such as via Hydrogen). Otherwise the individual can only do a very little, and often can't afford to do that.

or at least require the cost of putting carbon back into the ground to be factor price.

The problem is when you slow gdp it's the most marginalized that are hit the hardest.

So, the CEO only makes 10M instead of 50M(or whatever number) but what about the poor farmer that was making just enough to run his tractor to get by and feed his family.

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never heard a complete argument as to how central bank policy makes people want new cars, fancy clothes, or big houses (or tropical and ski vacations)… I think people want those luxuries and (many) are willing to work for them entirely independent of central bank policy.

Isn't it basic that if there's no point to saving and investing is a rigged casino, you might as well spend it on something fun? Consume consume consume! It's good for the economy (if you don't grow exponentially at any environmental cost then you can't keep up with inflation and our economy collapses)

> Isn't it basic that if there's no point to saving and investing is a rigged casino, you might as well spend it on something fun?

I don't think it works that way. I know a few people who are very financially conservative, and I am as well. None of them have responded to interest rates of 0% by consuming more. Everyone has shifted their accepted risk a little bit, but that's about it, they're still putting aside money.

On the other hand, the people I know that are spending every available coin for vacation and consumption already did so 20 years ago.

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#108
post #15
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that both your reply and mine are being downvoted without explanation as if it’s a controversial idea that consumers are culpable. And yet there are no replies making a logical argument about why this perspective is wrong?

It's an unpopular proposition to state that there exists a collective responsibility to make individual adaptations to combat climate change. I also argued that the lockdown was good for combating climate change, and there are many people who are desperate to leave their bedroom communities, hop in their car, and commute to the downtown office.

> there exists a collective responsibility to make individual adaptations to combat climate change.

Individual adaptations do not matter unless they are undertaken collectively. My personal lifestyle changes don’t impact the state of CO2 emissions in any significant way. Leading by example AND talking about it has more impact, but still negligible unless/until enough people do it.

Changing incentives, by making production account for the climate change externality, will shift more people into changing their lifestyle based on price alone. It’s the same reasoning behind targeting drug dealers and cartels more heavily than end-users.

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#109

We've known aboht climate change for 40 years. We've all individually and collectively chosen to ignore the problem. Now is the point where we lie and pretend no one told us and it was all somehow a conspiracy by big oil, big meat, big airline-travel etc to force us to emit when we didnt want to. Count me out.

If I benefited just as much as the CEOs where's my 5th empty mansion on the beach?

Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed

#110

People act like oil companies are the ones burning oil. They’re just responding to demand. We need to make oil less competitive, with better alternatives. No point or even value in demonizing these companies — the whole world is complicit.

These disinformation campaigns are a major obstacle to introducing the kind of reforms required to decarbonize our economy. Overcoming these obstacles largely requires shining a light on their bad behavior so the oil companies (and other industry groups) lose credibility and thus undermine their disinformation campaigns.

Perhaps to your point, there's no way out of this mess without carbon pricing, and even Democrats (who profess to believe that climate change is an existential threat) won't rally behind it even though it would free up massive amounts of money to fund their redistributive programs--choosing instead to spend large amounts of money on symbolic efforts such as a "citizens climate corps". I suspect this speaks in large part to the extent to which corporations have politicians in their pockets (certainly Joe Manchin is in the pocket of the coal industry and doesn't even pretend otherwise). Note that this isn't to say Republicans are better--by and large Republicans haven't even signed onto the idea that climate change poses an existential threat.

EDIT: everyone should write their congresspeople and urge them to support carbon pricing initiatives. Here's a dead-simple link that takes your email and your address, identifies your representatives, and gives you a form pre-populated with a canned message that will be emailed when you click "submit": https://citizensclimatelobby.org/house/

Post reply on HN