[neatwithatwist]

Not to mention individuals aren't even the cause of creating most of the greenhouse gas volume behind climate change. It's massive corporations creating something like 90% of all greenhouse gasses? 100 of them create 71%

(https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=corpora...)

So when Shell and BP are on Twitter sharing ways to change your behavior to save the environment, it's like the murderer encouraging you to wear a lucky charm to prevent being murdered, as they're standing over you with the knife.

[gruez]

>It's massive corporations creating something like 90% of all greenhouse gasses? 100 of them create 71%

And why are those corporations emitting Co2? For the fun of it? Because it generates profit for them? No, it's a means to an end for them, which is producing products that ultimately go to consumers. On the flip side, if you're a consumer and 80% of your co2 emissions are indirectly generated by corporations working on your behalf, you don't get absolved for that 80%.

[imtringued]

Great, now you have two parties who both don't think they are responsible for the problem. Customers blame companies. Companies blame customers. Nobody thinks about the real problem which is the fact that governments are allowing the continued subsidy of CO2 emissions. You can't expect a system that is built around incentivizing CO2 emissions to reduce CO2 emissions for the sake of charity.

[EveYoung]

Unless individuals change their purchasing behaviour, big cooperations will have little incentive to do anything different. It's the same as "blaming" China for high emissions while still buying products manufactured under these conditions.

[away_throw]

The question is where to source alternatives. It is significantly harder to find products from alternative sources. For some products, the only solution is DIY.

[Tarsul]

well, if only we hadn't have forgotten that corporations work for the people, imagine the world we could live in.