‘Polluter elite’ are plundering the planet to point of destruction, says Oxfam after comprehensive study of climate inequality
    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      19·
      1 年前

      We pretend we can keep car culture and convert the whole industry to EV when that is financially and physically impossible.

      It’s certainly possible to convert the whole car industry to EVs. The only trouble is it won’t actually solve our problems because car dependency ruins all sorts of other things in addition to the climate, and for most of those the real issue is the amount of space they take up, so even running them on magic pixie dust wouldn’t help.

        • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
          81·
          1 年前

          Okay, let me rephrase: even if we assume for the purpose of this discussion that it were possible to 100% transition to EVs, it still wouldn’t solve our problems because the worst thing wrong with cars is the sheer amount of space they take up, to the point of forcing us to literally destroy our cities to make room for them. Hell, the damage from mining the concrete for all the parking lots alone dwarfs the damage from mining the lithium for batteries!

          That’s the point I was trying to make, not quibbling over EVs.

    • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
      5·
      1 年前

      less than 100 years ago, everyone used horses my part the world, we couldn’t afford Model T’s in 1923. People now whine an electric car is unsuitable for winter, that’s trues, but only true because the horse infrastructure of no more than 20 miles between population centers has disappeared, it’s 50 to 100 now, with a population density per square mile of less then .25

  • BeefPiano@lemmy.worldEnglish
    23·
    1 年前

    Meanwhile the poorest 66% will suffer far more from climate change than the richest 1%. Heat deaths from wet bulb events, famine, unsafe air…

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          32·
          1 年前

          Reminds me of a really funny reddit comment of someone trying to solve inequality: Take the richest person in the world and murder them. They would do this until people will be so afraid of having money that they’ll just give it all away, thus eventually achieving equality.

          Obviously it’s a dogshit idea that could only come from the finest brains of preddit, but it’s pretty funny to see a liberal take on communism.

          • FaeDrifterEnglish
            1·
            1 年前

            Also that’s kinda what China does already and it hasn’t really worked to close the wealth gap.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    212·
    1 年前

    These articles are somewhat disingenuous. It isn’t their mansions, their jets, or their yachts. It’s because of the amount they have invested in fossil fuels and other industries. A better question is why do they have enough money to own so much.

    • library_napper@monyet.cc
      3·
      1 年前

      What? That’s where it matters most! Those are the biggest polluters.

      If it just talked about their minuscule lifestyles, it would be disingenuous

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 年前

      And as private shareholders they demand those oil companies maximize irresponsible profit at the planet’s expense.

      When you own something, you bear responsibility for it. Not legally sadly, because these criminals make the laws, but in every other sense.

      You don’t get to own oil stock and then credibly claim you aren’t the problem. No one puts a gun to anyone’s head and says take the stake in blood money.

  • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
    175·
    1 年前

    We are the top 1%.

    What’s unmentioned is that the top 1%, the top 2%, the top 5%, even the top 10% has a disproportionate impact on emissions. That group is made up mostly by the West, but also the rich elite in China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, etc.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    4·
    1 年前

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    The richest 1% of humanity is responsible for more carbon emissions than the poorest 66%, with dire consequences for vulnerable communities and global efforts to tackle the climate emergency, a report says.

    For the past six months, the Guardian has worked with Oxfam, the Stockholm Environment Institute and other experts on an exclusive basis to produce a special investigation, The Great Carbon Divide.

    Over the period from 1990 to 2019, the accumulated emissions of the 1% were equivalent to wiping out last year’s harvests of EU corn, US wheat, Bangladeshi rice and Chinese soya beans.

    “The super-rich are plundering and polluting the planet to the point of destruction and it is those who can least afford it who are paying the highest price,” said Chiara Liguori, Oxfam’s senior climate justice policy adviser.

    The extravagant carbon footprint of the 0.1% – from superyachts, private jets and mansions to space flights and doomsday bunkers – is 77 times higher than the upper level needed for global warming to peak at 1.5C.

    Oxfam International’s interim executive director, Amitabh Behar, said: “Not taxing wealth allows the richest to rob from us, ruin our planet and renege on democracy.

    The original article contains 853 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      4·
      1 年前

      Not sure why you chose Bill Gates who is the only one of this club actively trying to help this segment of world society and ostensibly planning to give away his wealth. Bezos, Musk, Jobs, all far more deserving of this.

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        16·
        1 年前

        Because he’s the biggest player in the depopulation narrative. I thought him being responsible for forever covid to make a buck and his ties to Epstein would have been enough to ruin his reputation but I guess LTT was a warning that PR can whitewash even the biggest monster.