49 ms·
Exxon Predicts World Will Miss Climate-Change Targets
- meepmorp 3y ago"We're doing our best to help make sure that prediction comes to pass!"
- Bostonian 3y agoIt is common and convenient to blame big oil companies for climate change, but they are not creating the demand for hydrocarbons.
- cjbenedikt 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- JohnFen 3y agoThat's why you never see them trying to increase hydrocarbon use through marketing, lobbying for favorable laws and against other energy sources, and so on.
- mistrial9 3y agocan you also explain fifty years of leaded gas ?
- gorkish 3y agoYes. Adding lead to fuel makes it better and less expensive, which is why it's still done for aviation fuel. I'm not advocating for it, of course, but acting as if there is some kind of conspiracy is just ridiculous. Humans, historically, have consumed all available energy resources; the humans who consume the most energy generally have the largest advantage. This simple fact does not seem likely to change.
- Clubber 3y ago>It is common and convenient to blame big oil companies for climate change, but they are not creating the demand for hydrocarbons. It is common and convenient to blame drug dealers for fentanyl deaths, but they are not creating the demand for opoids.
- Clubber 3y agoUS has been lowering total CO2 emissions since 2007. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/carbon-co2-emissions#:~:text=U.S.%20carbon%20(co2)%20emissions%20for,a%203.24%25%20increase%20from%202017 https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/carb.... China, on the other hand, has been increasing emissions. It's currently more than double what the US emissions are. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CHN/china/carbon-co2-emissions#:~:text=China%20carbon%20(co2)%20emissions%20for,a%204.74%25%20increase%20from%202017 https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CHN/china/carbon-co2-e.... Not sure how we plan on lowering China's emissions.
- Kirby64 3y agoUnderstandably the magnitude amount matters more for the environment, but per capita China is half of what US is, no? The trend line is worrying of course, but in per capita terms US is still much worse.
- Clubber 3y agoI'm not sure that matters. For example, Russia, per capita has way more nuclear weapons than the US. If a nuclear exchange happens, I don't think that statistic makes much difference. I certainly welcome you to convince me otherwise.
- cududa 3y agoEach person in the US uses significantly more energy than each person in China. As a nation, China has more people but use less energy per person. We (the U.S.) should work on reducing our per person usage. How in the world does your example/ analogy apply to this in any way
- Clubber 3y ago>How in the world does your example/ analogy apply to this in any way If a nuclear exchange happens, it doesn't matter what the per capita nuclear warhead statistic is, it just matters the total number of detonations. Warming is the same, the per capita CO2 emissions isn't important (other than for shaming purposes), it's the total emissions. Total emissions is what drives warming, not per capita emissions. You seem to want to give China a pass because their CO2 per capita is lower than the US even though their total emissions is more than double, which kinda proves my point. Qatar has the highest per capita emissions in the world, but they are 40th in total emissions. Drastically lowering their emissions will have very little effect on warming. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/ https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...
- klyrs 3y agoWolf predicts sheep won't make it past dinner?
- archo 3y agohttps://archive.is/aL1fX https://archive.is/aL1fX