> I've always found that stat to be misleading, as it uses the word "responsible" in a very unconventional way
I used that word, while the original article[1] and report[2] use "linked to". Maybe you'll find that less misleading.
> GHG emissions come from fossil fuels extracted by these companies, even though the companies themselves aren't the ones using the fossil fuels nor producing the GHGs.
That's addressed in the report. Usage of their products makes up the majority of emissions, but it's not true that companies don't use the fuels or emit GHGs.
> Scope 3 emissions account for 90% of total company emissions and result from the downstream combustion of coal, oil, and gas for energy purposes.
Direct operational emissions (scope 1) are also taken into account. These "are attributed to the extraction and production of oil, gas, and coal."
> I fail to see how China Coal (top 1), Saudi Aramco (2nd), or Gazprom (3rd) could do anything about their process to significantly reduce the amount of emmisions from their products.
Oh, they can do plenty. From reducing their own operational emissions and optimizing the refinement of their products, to diversifying their business strategies to avoid these emissions in the first place. How about investing their vast resources into driving climate technology forward? These companies should be the first to invest in new technology, instead of startups having to claw their way into the market.
How about we stop the growth of coal production in developing countries? If China alone would avoid making the same mistakes the West did, it would have a huge impact.
But you're conveniently building a strawman that addresses only fossil fuel producing companies. Let's ignore these and focus on other industries. Are there no changes these companies can do to significantly reduce their emissions? I doubt that very much. Changing how these companies operate would have a far greater positive effect than what any tech startup, or group of individuals, can do.
> Other solutions from climate tech like better electricity production and storage needs to happen simultaneously, not after by "getting our priorities straight".
I never said that other solutions don't need to happen simultaneously. But it's clear that the brunt of the responsibility is on corporations and governments.
[1]: https://www.cdp.net/en/articles/media/new-report-shows-just-...
[2]: https://cdn.cdp.net/cdp-production/cms/reports/documents/000...