cross-posted from: feddit.org/post/1097575
Should must be china and the usa
take their money and arrest those responsible
Submitted 16 hours ago by FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://feddit.org/pictrs/image/a53fe70c-a7ec-403a-bed7-ab1c36fe92c2.png
Comments
IndieGoblin@lemmy.4d2.org 21 minutes ago
darthelmet@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
To the people who are saying “Yeah but you’re the one who buys the oil!!!” Please stop. Please think about any of the context surrounding those supposedly individualist decisions. Please think about what the most practical solutions are for fixing the problem. You can do that and be helpful or you can be smug and look down on others.
Sure, you buy and drive the car, but you didn’t:
- Design towns and cities that can only be easily traversed by car.
- Decide where jobs and housing were located.
- Spend millions of dollars to lobby against public transit.
- Spend millions of dollars to lobby against regulations.
- Spend millions of dollars to lobby against green energy investments.
- Spend millions of dollars to lobby for imperialist wars to access oil.
- Spend millions of dollars to spread misinformation about climate change.
- Decide what cars were available to buy and at what price. (Demand driving supply only makes sense if consumers have a way to signal that they want something that isn’t being offered. The main market way of doing that would be to not buy anything until the right good is offered… but as stated above, people can’t just opt out of needing a car if the places where they can live and work are built around cars.)
- Decide to be too poor to buy luxury goods masquerading as green alternatives.
Framing the issue in terms of individual decisions lets the people who have most actively stood in the way of progress off the hook and ironically shirks any real responsibility to fix the issue. You think by saying that it’s us doing it that you take responsibility for your actions and therefore because YOU got a hybrid car or some shit, you did your part and everyone else needs to do the same and it’s not your responsibility anymore. Needing to put in the political struggle to take on the corporate interests destroying the planet takes effort that deviates from your normal life. You have to actually talk to people, work with them, and take part in collective action. And your responsibility isn’t over until the problem is solved.
Also, sort of related: I always take issue with how dealing with issues like climate change is framed in terms of making sacrifices. Like sure, are we going to be able to do as much excessive consumption as we do now? No. But there are so many climate policies that would also just make life better for people in the short/medium term. We would be happier, healthier, and safer in a world where we got rid of our dependence on cars and replaced it with walkable cities and good mass transit. But instead of talking about how good it could be, instead the message ends up being “You’re a bad person for diving a car. You need to give up using your car and go either walk to your job which is too far away and across a bunch of busy streets or cram yourself onto the underfunded public transportation that is crowded, slow, unreliable, and falling apart.” No wonder people get so defensive. We don’t want them to have to use the bad infrastructure. We want it to be so good that it’s the best option by far. Pitch that future instead of lecturing people.
Eristalis@reddthat.com 4 hours ago
I don’t understand this argument. On the one had you have sympathy for the average car user who hasn’t the time or resources to struggle with poor transport infrastructure and don’t necessarily have the resources to make preventative purchasing decisions, but then, on the other had you say
Needing to put in the political struggle to take on the corporate interests… takes effort that deviates from your normal life
You don’t seem to have avoided the responsibility being laid at the individual at all. You’ve kept it firmly in the same place. All you’ve done is allowed those individuals to keep their materialistic lifestyle because “It’s OK, I’m an ‘activist’”.
Activism, for most people, is not sacrifice. Its a jolly good day out with a cool social group, sometimes there’s even free music, circus acts, the works. You get to waive a flag, and everyone congratulates you on what an amazing person you are.
What’s properly amazing is taking a slightly less well-paying job because it’s on a bus route, or not going out twice a week so you can afford organic cotton instead of polyester, or avoiding that deal trip to Tibet to meditate with monks to save fuel. Zero social credit, zero visibility.
And if these big companies have the economic system so stitched up that individual choices barely matter, then what on earth makes you think they won’t have the political system similarly stitched up so that individual activism doesn’t make a difference either?
darthelmet@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
My point is, the important part isn’t assigning blame, it’s taking actions that actually have some path to success. You really can’t ethically consume your way out of climate change. Identifying the corporations and governments most responsible for blocking progress isn’t a mere moral victory, it’s focusing our efforts.
What’s properly amazing is taking a slightly less well-paying job because it’s on a bus route,
Sure, but not everyone can do that. And I don’t mean it’s just difficult, but literally there are a finite number of jobs and housing options that will fit that criteria. As our societies are set up now, it is not physically possible for enough people to make a sacrifice like that for it to make a difference. That’s why collective action is needed to make those big structural changes in the first place.
And if these big companies have the economic system so stitched up that individual choices barely matter, then what on earth makes you think they won’t have the political system similarly stitched up so that individual activism doesn’t make a difference either?
Oh 100%. I’m deeply concerned that there may be no peaceful, democratic way out of this. But that’s step 2. Step 1, regardless of what our strategy ought to be, is organizing. Whether we need voters, protestors, boycotters, or an army, we need people who are able to coordinate with others. It’s not individual activism, it’s collective action.
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
We’re all responsible. I’m sure a lot of Romans used this argument when their slaves came after them during the Servile Wars. And it probably didn’t go well.
rockerface@lemmy.cafe 6 hours ago
Trains and trams are based af
craftrabbit@lemmy.zip 5 hours ago
Buses are pretty great too, to connect the more rural areas
Jack@lemmy.ca 4 hours ago
Is it also not the fault of the 99% who vote for non-Green parties who then make the laws causing your bullet points?
darthelmet@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Waaaaaaaay less than the people who have used their power to corrupt said system. Capitalists wouldn’t have spent this much money on lobbying and propaganda if it wasn’t needed. They try their best to keep some people from voting and the rest from having any viable choices that reflect what they want.
It’s just counterproductive to conceptualize our current situation in terms of individualized guilt. It’s not like going to privately check a box every few years is doing much more than choosing to consume a bit less. We need to be organized. Our enemies are and they’re winning.
Digit@lemmy.wtf 3 hours ago
Y’know we could have had spaceships each since the 1930s, right?
Or even just running our cars on seed oils, like hempseed oil, or plant derived ethanol.
Or even just running our cars on water.
… If they’d stop killing inventors and stop abusing the patent system to secretize emancipatory technologies.
starlinguk@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Bingo. I used to work for Shell. This is exactly what they do. And whenever I tell people I get told I’m a conspiracy theorist.
Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 hours ago
Heeh! :D I’ve just had effectively the exact same thing, except for advertising. “Mind control does not exist” they said, to the face of one saying they used to be one of those doing it!
moopet@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
I hope the water thing is /s
Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 hours ago
I hope the water thing is /s
Why do you want that to be sarcasm?
Wouldn’t you prefer that to be true??
You hope differently to me.
Water powered car’s been invented more than just that once with the famous Stanley Meyer story. Y’know those blow torch thingies, that use water? Yeah, same basic principle. And remember in that special episode of Top Gear (I think it was maybe the Myanmar episode), where hammond put a little water in his engine (in with the fuel) to give it more go at altitude? Same principle as many of the "water powered car"s use, where instead of (afaiu) electromagnetic alignment catalyst, they use chemical catalysts (and other starters and combustants etc), to which some eager naysayers throw the baby out with the bathwater and proclaim it all bunk because those designs were not using pure water. … I’m not sure any use entirely pure water, do they? Didn’t even Stanley Meyers design involve some kind of other chemical in the mix too? I’m not looking into it any further than is popularly known. I don’t want to be mistaken for an inventor, attracting the attention of the ruthless unscrupulous sorts with a lot invested in their rentier ride. ;)
Amusing aside… can haz steam powered car too. ;) Too contrived to call that water powered? Hehe. Even a Stirling engine?
Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
The whole post is ridiculous. Putting cars on the water and inventing boats is pretty funny though.
yesman@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
This is a false choice between huge lifestyle changes for everyday people and regulating the polluters. Regulating the polluters is going to cause huge lifestyle changes for everyday people.
The idea that any of us get to go on as usual is the main roadblock to meaningful climate action.
Signtist@bookwyr.me 38 minutes ago
Honestly, I believe the main roadblock is the idea that change will need to happen at all. The sad truth is that most people are fine with contributing to climate change so long as they can keep doing what they’re accustomed to doing.
The only way I can see for meaningful climate action to happen is to get people on board with regulation polluters while allowing them to be ignorant to the fact that lifestyle changes will have to follow, and then when they’re forced to adapt, they will. People are much better at changing when they can’t afford not to than when they have the option to just keep on doing what they always have.
People are also a lot more likely to make sacrifices to keep up momentum after a win like regulating polluters; few people are going to change first when they can see a company like Shell - polluting more every day than they have in their entire lives - going unchecked. A change has to happen to give them hope that the climate can even be saved before they try to make changes themselves to save it.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 14 hours ago
Well can’t we just ban Shell from selling oil, and then get in our F150s to drive to the airport?
gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 2 hours ago
i assume F150 is an electric vehicle. electricity doesn’t come from nowhere. where does the energy come from?
PoopingCough@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I’m cool with that. I also don’t think it would necessarily be huge in terms of inconvenience for the average person because alternatives would pop up before long. For example, if air travel became prohibitively expensive we might actually see an expanse of passenger rail for domestic travel. It’s ridiculous that it’s still cheaper/more convenient to take a 45 min flight (plus the time the whole airport experience takes) vs a couple hours (or less with high speed rail) train ride. Certain plastics might also become too expensive so we might see the return to more sustainable packaging. A lot of the oil and byproduct consumption from the average person comes down to lack of choice ratger than people choosing products made from oil ober alternatives.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 25 minutes ago
It would be a massive inconvenience, but it’ll still be worth it. High speed rail takes many years to build. People hate lifestyle changes. Hell, people will be unhappy at the changes to food packaging. Everything will become more expensive and the economy will contract.
If we go in promising it’ll be easy people will get mad and balk when it gets hard. If we go in explaining how it’ll suck, but that we’ve got a plan to fix the problems and it’ll be worth it then we can succeed
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 8 hours ago
No, we are past that point. A gradual reduction in CO2 levels is not enough any more. If you want to save billions of lives we need to cut CO2 production hard and right now. Since that is never going to happen you happy go lucky scenario becomes impossible. In any realistic climate scenario humanity is already fucked, it’s only matter of how much exactly.
whoisearth@lemmy.ca 13 hours ago
Nothing changes until the price of an electric car is less than the cost of a gas one when it comes to the vehicle cost.
A Hyundai Sonata is 35k CAD
A Hyundai IONIQ 6 is 55k CAD
Miss me with that bullshit.
wax@feddit.nu 8 hours ago
Hyundai Sonata is a budget sedan. Ionic is their top of the line electric. Perhaps look at Hyundai Inster or Hyundai Kona or something.
Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 hours ago
This is why buying new cars is dumb,
A used Hyundai sonata 2024 is ~20k USD A used Hyundai ioniq 6 2024 is ~24k USD
Yeah it may be more upfront, but most people finance any way and your monthly payment will be offset buy your fuel savings.
There’s enough of a stock of used EVs, quite often with low mileage, at this point that cost is becoming less of an issue for people then the perceived lack of convenience. That and dealerships not promoting them because they get less maintenance fees and there lower margin then a giant SUV or pickup.
kamee@lemmy.zip 5 hours ago
I bought my fully loaded ioniq 5 for 31K euros Used…
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 hours ago
Now factor in lifetime costs of repairs and gas/electricity!
BTW I have no idea which one is which of your two cars 😅
fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 9 hours ago
Slate is 25k
fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 9 hours ago
K that’s fine
fizzle@quokk.au 13 hours ago
Yes, but regulating pollutors requires a populace that won’t accept anything less. Instead people are placated by paper straws.
gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 2 hours ago
then where does energy come from?
Tango@piefed.ca 14 hours ago
>>"Spoiler alert: it’s not you”
>>proceeds to display a chart of companies who sell a fuel we all use
bort@sopuli.xyz 8 hours ago
I hope big oil is paying you well for propagating their “personal carbon-footprint”-narrative.
What do do you say? They don’t even pay you? … Then why are you doing it?
Tango@piefed.ca 7 hours ago
Because I don’t trust anybody who tells me things I wanna hear like “you bear no responsibility; it’s somebody else’s fault”.
Oil companies couldn’t sell if nobody was buying. The idea that the world can be fixed and I won’t need to sacrifice a thing is a little too good to be true.
VoteNixon2016@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 hours ago
If you can spot me $30,000 I’ll get an electric car today
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 7 hours ago
30,000? A domestically manufacturered, highway-capable EV is 10,000 USD here in vn and even cheaper over in China.
Who do you think is responsible for your inability to buy reasonably priced evs?
Tango@piefed.ca 7 hours ago
Just do what you can, when you can. It’s all any of us can do.
FinalRemix@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
First, I have to get a new range hood, repair my foundation drain, regrade my yard, and earn a spare 30k after that.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 9 hours ago
Whatcha gonna drive it on? The streets and roads are a major source of CO2 by themselves.
psx_crab@lemmy.zip 7 hours ago
Well i don’t create the system. Given the chance i would rather not be a part of it.
peteypete420@sh.itjust.works 5 hours ago
Ur dum
Wander@sh.itjust.works 11 hours ago
Ah yes companies that famously refine oil only to pour it into a hole and light it on fire for their own amusement, no one else uses it at all.
If its just these companies that would be affected let’s just close them down. I’m sure it would make no difference what so ever.
ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 3 hours ago
500M MT
Stacking metric prefixes. That’s how big the problem is.
1984@lemmy.today 7 hours ago
At some point, you realize that ordinary people are not responsible for any of these big “problems” (some doesn’t even exist).
Corporations and governments are responsible for all problems we have. They create them with their laws and their greed for power.
Mwa@thelemmy.club 4 hours ago
every big oil company have alot of controversies wtf
melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 hour ago
Don’t the non-auto companies who dump sludge in the rivers count for anything anymore?!
hanrahan@slrpnk.net 2 hours ago
the voters who keep electing reoeresentives that allow this to happen ?
We’re going to need bigger jails
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Godammit. I’ve boycotted Exxon and BP, for their negligence that led to spills, for a long time. I knew shell probably wasn’t much better but I’ve preferred them anyhow. Turns out I was helping the worst offender. Awesome.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz 15 hours ago
It in fact doesn’t matter much which one you buy from, they all sell the same product and the product they sell is the problem.
Yes, it’s impossible to effect change as a single person so government action is needed… But the necessary consequence of that is that we also stop consuming as much fuel.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
if it’s impossible to affect change as a single person, then why do anything at all? Why bother to vote? I hear this logic all the time and it doesn’t make sense to me.
“Don’t bother making personal changes, voting will save us!” people vote for Trump “Wait not like that”
That’s not to say that public policy is pointless. “Tragedy of the commons” tells us that regulation is necessary. But I think the framing is wrong. The culprit here is not oil companies. It’s oil. If you tell people “oil companies are evil”, and tax the oil companies more, these people are just going to get mad when the taxes trickle down to them in the form of higher gas prices.
The correct framing is “Oil and gas cost more to us, than the cost of simply digging it out of the ground. The added taxes are to reflect the true cost”. Then people will understand why gas prices need to go up.
Then add on some Infographics and memes that show how much more efficient public transit is. How solar panels pay off over the long term. Etc. Because personal responsibility does in fact make a difference.
Tja@programming.dev 7 hours ago
And you base that on… a shitpost on lemmy without a source or even a damn label? It’s literally bunch of rectangles.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Cool, you’re a jerk.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 16 hours ago
Who buys and burns most of the fuel they create and why?
faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 16 hours ago
I always hate that most people are happy to blame corporations, forgetting we are consuming that’s why corporations are creating.
14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 15 hours ago
yeah, it is like blaming china for a pollution, when that pollution is externality of cheap shit we buy from them. it is our pollution in the end.
that isn’t an argument for blaming the end consumer, because that problem is not going to be solved from the bottom, but it is also childish to pretend like we, the consumers, are not complicit.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
I agree. It’s obvious to me that it will never be a tidy “it’s just them to blame” scenario but people really want it to be, regardless. I suspect the downvote crew will show up soon…
quill7513@anarchist.nexus 15 hours ago
“there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” has to me always been a clear call to reduce your consumption within a capitalist system. yes, it is these shit heads who shackle us. but when we reduce our dependence on them we begin the breaking of our bonds to a system that kills thousands every year
ChilledPeppers@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 hours ago
No ethical consumption under capitalism, I scream, at my local farmers market. (Made up quote btw).
But yeah, fuck oil companies, they are real fuckers.
kayzeekayzee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 hours ago
Wouldn’t be us if they hadn’t lobbied for decades against renewables
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 15 hours ago
It’s always easiest to blame someone else.
wander1236@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
You say this like buying only from sustainable companies is something everyone can just decide to do, and there haven’t been decades of lobbying and propaganda against policy that would make it possible at a collective level.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 12 hours ago
That’s true, if you’re in a wheelchair then I can see an argument for the necessity of cars. But if you have working legs, you don’t really need a car.
arctanthrope@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
because not purchasing anything that is produced or transported with energy from fossil fuels means fucking off into the woods to starve to death naked in a hut made of mud and twigs
TheMightyCat@ani.social 15 hours ago
As if there is nothing in between “don’t do anything” and “go live in the woods”
bryndos@fedia.io 15 hours ago
Are you an AI? It sounds live you live in a binary world.
TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 15 hours ago
It’s actually the capitalist system as a whole. The large fossil fuel companies of course push for extraction and maximizing their customer base, but it is the entire underlying economic system that ensues it is wasteful and that alternatives for energy production are avoided or limited.
Let’s go through some examples.
Just think about all the jobs on the planet. How many of them are actually necessary and doing work that prioritizes sustainability or limits environmental impact? How much is producing pointless goods or forcing them to be grown in wasteful ways in order to maximize profit? Is the fruit in your fruit cup grown in Latin America, packaged in Thailand, and sold in Germany? Is your job in or related to finance, real estate, or insurance (all useless or leech industries)? Are there 30 people doing a job when only 3 are needed because 5 companies are doing redundant hiring between each other?
Look at one of the largest single-entity consumer of fossil fuels on the planet: the US military. More than the vast majority of countries. Now you might say, “hey wasn’t this about the economic system?”, and yes it is. The purpose of the US military is not “defense” of the United States itself, its lands. The purpose of the US military is to enforce its unipolar status as the primary seat of global capital. Bases all around the world, surrounding shipping lanes and energy. Their most conspicuous targets revolving around either energy (Venezuela, Iraq, Iran) or opponents of the capitalist system or peripheral countries trying to assert a slightly higher level of economic autonomy.
The reason for this is that the economic system is driven entirely by profit-seeking, namely accumulating more and more capital via injecting capital into activities. Productive, redundant, destructive, capital doesn’t care so long as more comes back through the activity. Environmental sustainability is not something capital considers except as a new way to market selling more products and therefore increasing itself. Capital industrialized entire nations while dooming generations to lung problems from soot and famine conditions and dust bowls from over extraction and the elimination of the commons. It simply does not care, at all, and it is in control of nearly every human on the planet, including those who own businesses, pressing them into the capital-increasing social activities it spurns.
You could end every energy monopoly tomorrow, even nationalize them, and the vast majority of emissions would still remain, as the actual primary engine would be left intact.
The only way to secure an environmental future is to overthrow capitalism and put people, not capital, in charge.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
US and Europe carbon emissions have gone down in the past 20 years, while China’s has grown rapidly. China accounts for %35 of the world’s emissions. Of course lots of manufacturing for goods happens in China, but this just tells me that capitalism is not to blame here, China is. China needs to raise their carbon taxes. Or maybe manufacturing needs to come back to the US and Europe, where it can be properly regulated.
starsoaked_lily@lemmy.ml 6 hours ago
nice stats, now lets talk about emissions per person - neat how you picked the stat that ignores the current state of things and only focuses on how even more emissions the west used to produce
also, the reason the wheels haven’t well and truly fallen off of the global economy is because china has halved oil imports recently to avoid the ill advised us war on iran leading to an oil availability cliff. they (regrettably, but perhaps unavoidably) have used coal heavily (in combination with larger oil reserves than the rest of the world combined) to cut their own demand dramatically and abruptly to bail out the rest of the world
it isn’t unreasonable to see china’s short term reliance on more dirty forms of energy as a tool for energy independence (critical when the us can single handedly cause an international fuel crisis) being used strategically while china continues to rapidly switch to renewables at a rate that puts most western countries to shame
in short, maybe china isn’t to blame; capitalism and neoliberalism is
GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 11 hours ago
Capitalism moves manufacturing to a location with less regulation or the overhead from regulation, resulting in more profits for the capitalists. This is clearly not because of capitalism.
Spoiler
/s for those who need it.
TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 11 hours ago
Most greenhouse gas emissions occurred when colonizer Western countries were industrialized. They were not “properly regulated”, instead they were offshored in order to discipline labor and extract even greater profits. The offshoring was not exclusive to China, GHGs accordingly increased everywhere that further industrialized as a result of this. This effect is about as capitalist as it gets, trying to maximize profits via labor discipline and opening new fronts for increased exploitation (more profit per worker).
China’s approach to this shift was to realize it was an opportunity to build their own productive forces, that capitalists would give up productive centers and move them to other countries, and those countries should be able to domestically gain and upper hand so long as they ensured that production could broadly increased with every investment. For example, China requires technology transfer as part of direct foreign investment. China was correct in this and it is why it is an exception to the rule for national development as a former peripheral country. Compare ita development to India, which did not require such transfers or focus on building production.
Now, again, this means that industrial production moved outside the imperial core and into other countries, including but not limited to China. That industry did not suddenly become green nor did it become immune to the global economic system. It meant being wed to it. As we all know China’s strategy is one of interdependency with global capitalism even as they try to steer an otherwise anarchic process in a coherent direction via the commanding heights of the economy.
And yet we can see the difference those commanding heights make even on this specific issue. China is the global exporter and consumer of green energy, leading the charge on solar panels that countries like the US sanction and tariff, instead promoting fossil fuels. China is taking the actual steps you’d imagine Western nations doing (even though they never have), like setting public targets and meeting or exceeding them, and sticking to their obligations.
Imagine what could be done if every country could work in concert for those developments. Specifically, against the anarchic tendencies of the market and capitalist profit seeking.
jaykrown@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Shell is an evil demon corporation.
Caitlyynn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 hours ago
Whoah there, give demons some slack. They aren’t destroying life as we know it on a global scale just for a few extra bucks
abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
Let’s bring back this old trope:
GEKOLONISEERD
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 12 hours ago
anotherspinelessdem@lemmy.ml 12 hours ago
So the US, with 1/5 the population of China, produces almost half the CO~2~ emissions that China does? How much is that per person? I wish they could get that Chinese level efficiency, maybe they need more solar panels.
Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 7 hours ago
Why blame China? They do this so you guys can have crappy stuff that won’t last because your country makes you too poor to buy local 😉
nanometer1625@thelemmy.club 11 hours ago
Striving to maximize profit is what companies do. Blaming them is not useful. Instead, advocate for and promote government policies that would disincentivize fossil fuel use, like carbon taxes.
brem@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
When you’re traveling through the desolation that is Midwest US, you’ll notice there’s a lot of shell stations. They’re kind of like “Casey’s” (except you hear about “Casey’s” more because of the pizza) located in many small towns that have only a dollar store with a refrigerated section as the only source of groceries. Food deserts full of 200 pound children riding electric scooters while staring at their phone. It’s terrible.
…I digress
A fun fact… in the Midwest US; the reason so many small towns are 14 miles apart is that’s how far a horse could carry a full wagon in a single day. So they built train stops every 14 miles. And somehow, 125+ years later, those lil towns still exist. They grow the corn that becomes syrup in candy and soda & whatnot. Also those towns all have a “Shell” station because of some backroom handshake deals done a long time ago.
brem@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Actually, it might’ve been 7 miles. Either way, 7 or 14… it’s true. Look it up :)
marcos@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Fucking adopt renewables already and reserve the criminal calling for the people actively sabotaging the change.
Yeah, many of those people work for some of those companies, but their work is not producing barrels of oil.
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 11 hours ago
As if oil companies aren’t the tip of the spear of anti-renewable propaganda and climate change denial.
ignirtoq@feddit.online 14 hours ago
It’s worth stating that this is showing just the private company contributions (private as in not owned by national governments). State-owned oil companies of various nations contribute massively as well, so beyond the
bribeslobbying problem there’s a direct conflict of interest for many nations that get a substantial amount of revenue from those state-owned oil companies.DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
This is fantasy. Let the corruption run wild. Let the rivers of the nile run red once again.
TIEPilot@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
They left of china and India…
Lanske@lemmy.world 42 minutes ago
Shell also dodge paying fair taxes. ftm.eu/…/shell-shifted-billions-in-profits-to-tax…
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 11 minutes ago
Please, dodging taxes is the least of Shell’s atrocities.