[dlg]

Or if not, their work for 43 of the 100 largest global polluters [0] or illegal corruption in Africa? [1]

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/27/business/mckinsey-climate...

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/world/africa/mckinsey-sou...

[missedthecue]

I hate it when "studies" assign pollution to the company that pulled the oil from the ground. It's so dishonest, and perhaps even worse, it provides zero valuable insight. If I go joyride in a private jet, I'm the polluter, not Exxon Mobil for pulling the oil from the ground.

[BrianOnHN]

I prefer addressing issues at the source. Mental gymnastics are for the guilty.

[kortilla]

Right, the source here being the jet where the fuel is actually burned for energy.

[BrianOnHN]

Wrong. The jet is a matter of convenience. The fuel (source) being sufficiently inconvenient (expensive, illegal) would force alternative decisions.

[daniel-cussen]

Takes two to tango in this case.

The source is still where the fuel came from. You're talking about the sink it's ending up in.

[kwere]

do you know oil has a lot of uses that are not pure transportation/electricity/heating related and necesssary for the modern civilization ?

[BrianOnHN]

Yeah, like the plastics that kill our environment on another vector.

Stop apologizing for oil companies. Your brain power would be better spent solving how to stop literally pouring gas on the fire.

[neilv]

Why not both?