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 5 points 10 months 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.

[–] Mio@feddit.nu 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

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

[–] ichmagrum@feddit.de 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments