Carbon emissions
There seems to be a rather childish insistence out there that climate change is someone else’s fault. It’s not us, we, we who like cooked food, getting around or warm homes, that is driving the broiling of Flipper i those fumes of the last ice floe. Nope, it’s those damn capitalists, the Big Oil companies that’re doing it to us.
This becoming apparent in Shell asking the following:
Good question. You prepared to cycle to work instead of drive? Move south so as to require less heating, but not too far south so as to need airconditioning? What is it that you are going to change in your life so as to reduce that 10 tonnes of CO2-e a year or so that is the output of an average rich world consumer?
The actual answer is blame someone else:
Shell doesn’t emit 2% of all global emissions. The people who use Shell’s products do. That’s us.
Or, as we might adapt Billy S. The fault lies not in our oil companies but in ourselves.
Come on, think about capitalism, just for a moment. The aim is to make profits, profits are gained by getting ahold of other peoples’ money. For which you have to provide those peeps with something they value more than the money. People do tend to value hot food, warm houses and the ability to nip off to Montreal for a dirty weekend more than the money this costs them. But it’s the nosh, nesting and nookie that produces the emissions, not the company taking our money.
If we didn’t want oil and gas then Shell wouldn’t exist. Thus they’re our emissions, not Shell’s.
The language we use matters - it provides clarity to our own thoughts and enables…
It is now generally acknowledged that the structure of the NHS needs to be overhauled…
In the film Apollo 13, a loss of oxygen causes the crew to start inadvertently…
There's an idea out there which seems intuitive but then so many ideas do seem…
When we think about the darkly opaque goals of modern central bankers as they relate…
As the papers recently filled with the distressing images of desperate souls looking to escape…
View Comments
And if you cannot give people something they value more than their money, Prof. Hayhoe, then the aim is to nag and shame so others do what you want. If I had an apartment in downtown Chihuahua and, when I blow my nose, it comes out black, I'd support replacement of the city bus fleet at the expense of higher fares. What am I willing to give up to produce less plant-feeding CO2, to satisfy a scary computer prediction, to hope to eliminate scary weather? Nothing. Remember Covid: The demands never stop; all that happens is that the goal changes.
She's a professor of political 'science' - it's doubtful that she can count above 10 without removing her footwear.
Shell could argue that they do have a plan, persuade their customers to reduce demand for their product.
This makes as little sense as her reply.
Surely you mean 12...
Using Prof in one's Twitter title is psychopathic narcissism. Next thing she'll be begging for birthday honours so that she can call herself Dame Prof.
It's not necessarily pathological. But, like other uses of degrees and titles and "Dr" of education or social work, it reflects a desire on first meeting that your counterpart know that you outrank him.