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 oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
41–50 of 285 posts
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#42> That is, private individual actions don’t increase at a rate sufficient to affect the problem in a timely fashion; collective action seeking changes in policy and law can.
This is actually a description of the politics of "special interest groups" and it usually leads to horrible things. If an idea is only supported by 5% of the population, we generally do NOT want that 5% of the population driving the legislative agenda. Instead, ideas need to first gain broad support among the general population, at which point enacting legislation may be desirable in order to solve collective action problems such as preventing free riding.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#43People 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.
Most of our jobs depend on the creation of demand for products and services that didn't exist yesterday. Capitalism isn't strictly about fulfilling our needs, but perpetually creating new needs, in order to perpetually generate more profit. Those needs become real, we're all complicit only in that all of us are incapable at this point of honestly living a fossil fuel free life.
We can't radically change our society at this point, but it's naive and incorrect to assume that our unsustainable way of life was the only option. Most indigenous peoples around the globe had lived in a way that was sustainable. The Pre-columbian population of the America's is estimated to have been as high as 112 million people [0]. The societies were large and complex and yet still were able to avoid destroying their local portion of the biosphere.
Even in our industrial society there have been critics of our way of life every generation and there have been people working to silence that criticism, and it's not just the average person doing this work. One the example that I find particularly surprising is that the Club of Rome's Limits to Growth, published in 1972, was a fairly major part of the American zeitgeist, so much so that Ronal Reagan specifically attacked this idea in his famous quote:
> There are no great limits to growth because there are no limits of human intelligence, imagination, and wonder.
Consequently an era of aggressive neoliberalism means that ideologically people are less willing to accept that infinite growth on a finite planet is a problem than they were 50 years ago.
I think it's important not to fall into the easy trap of thinking that a bunch of evil oil execs are solely responsible for climate change, but at the same time it's overly simplistic, and perhaps equally dangerous, to simply say "this is what everyone wanted". A severe alcoholic might want to quit drinking, but at the same time wants to continue, if there is someone in that person's life encouraging and enabling their drinking we typically find that individual culpable in the former's struggle to recover.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
They are doing both. Cigarettes are a luxury item. Petroleum products are a requirement for modern life. You could fire all of the corporate PR propagandists and lobbyists on the planet and I doubt it would make a dramatic dent in oil consumption. Couldn’t possibly hurt though!
There's a good chance we could have had a carbon price or other real measures 10 or more years ago without the malignant denialism seed planted by their propagandists.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure how that CEOs response differs from . It is a rare case that you see a CEO decide that some other metric is more important than making money.
It doesn't. It's a CEO's fiduciary duty to act in shareholders best interests. EDIT: HN, you're really getting juvenile. Save downvotes for low quality comments, not 100% factual comments that you simply don't like.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#46You really can't drive a massive SUV where a smaller vehicle or even a bike might work perfectly well and then yell at Exxon about their greed.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#47Genuine 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…
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#48The 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…
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Nope. Consumers knew burning gasoline and diesel created pollution 60 years ago. They could have push for clean alternatives but didnt. Don’t give them a pass.
Re: Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed
#50I worked in the oil & gas industry about a decade ago. I recall a conversation with our CEO directly talking about renewables and the environment. He said, very clearly, that this entire industry is about money, and they will do whatever makes them the most money. If renewable ever paid more than oil, they'd go there. But direct from his mouth - it is 100% about money. If anyone doubts that they are greed-driven, jus…
> 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…
Not only that, but most consumers don't concretely understand the implications of "climate change" because most people can't summon a dozen climate researchers to do a study and communicate the results (indeed, in most places the actual studies are paywalled). And here too, corporations are deeply invested in making sure people believe that climate change is just a myth or that the implications aren't as severe as the science leads us to believe.