GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,533]

Now the nonsense about suing oil companies is being exposed as without any foundation, even from those who believe that CO2 is responsible for climate change, (which it is not).

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Debate-Over-Big-Oils-Role-in-Climate-Change.html

"To argue that Big Oil should be held primarily responsible for climate-related disasters, one must accept three questionable premises:

1. Companies responsible for just 5.4% of total emissions should bear the bulk of the blame, while ignoring other major contributors, including coal producers and nationalized oil companies.
2. Producers, not consumers, are responsible for emissions. Oil companies extract and refine fossil fuels, but consumers—individuals, businesses, and governments—burn them (while deriving benefit from doing so).
3. A handful of Western corporations should be punished despite accounting for only a fraction of global fossil fuel production. The vast majority of oil and gas production comes from national oil companies, such as those in Saudi Arabia, Russia, and China.

According to the Statistical Review of World Energy, the U.S. was responsible for 13.2% of global fossil fuel emissions in 2023. When accounting for all the carbon dioxide emissions of the past 60 years—before Asia-Pacific’s rapid industrialization—the U.S. share rises to 24.5%. Even if one were to irrationally blame oil companies alone, their share of total emissions is a small fraction of that number."

 

"If lawsuits against oil companies are justified, then logically, every consumer, airline, shipping company, and government that relied on fossil fuels for economic growth should be held accountable. The state of California profited enormously over the past 100 years from fossil fuel extraction. But such an approach would be impractical and economically disastrous. 

Suing oil companies won’t slow carbon emissions. It may score political points, but it does nothing to address the underlying issue. Instead of lawsuits, we need practical solutions that recognize the shared responsibility of producers, consumers, and policymakers alike."

[TailingsPond + 1,029]

55 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Now the nonsense about suing oil companies is being exposed as without any foundation

Your reading comprehension is weak.

That was not the point of the article, at all, read it again slowly.  They say they are taking too large of a portion of the blame - not denying the climate climate change science.  They agree there is foundation, but blame coal and other sources.  

Classic "but, but China does it more!" flawed argument. 

"Key Questions and Misplaced Blame

To argue that Big Oil should be held primarily responsible for climate-related disasters, one must accept three questionable premises:

1. Companies responsible for just 5.4% of total emissions should bear the bulk of the blame, while ignoring other major contributors, including coal producers and nationalized oil companies.
2. Producers, not consumers, are responsible for emissions. Oil companies extract and refine fossil fuels, but consumers—individuals, businesses, and governments—burn them (while deriving benefit from doing so).
3. A handful of Western corporations should be punished despite accounting for only a fraction of global fossil fuel production. The vast majority of oil and gas production comes from national oil companies, such as those in Saudi Arabia, Russia, and China."

 

Edited 9 hours ago by TailingsPond

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,281]

Some believe that “Big Oil” should be held financially accountable for climate-related disasters, such as California’s wildfires. Their rationale? Major oil and gas companies are profitable and have contributed significantly to atmospheric carbon emissions. 

A recent press release—“Chevron & Exxon could easily cover LA wildfire damages”—claimed that “mega-rich oil firms like Chevron and Exxon are knowingly driving and profiting from the climate crisis.”

Two California lawmakers have even introduced legislation to enable lawsuits against these companies. But do these claims hold up under scrutiny?

The fires in California were caused by annual high winds and electricy lines that spartked when shorted out. the underbrush got going too fast for the fire departments to handle and hydrants were lacking water. Man made fire as is most on west coast. Lot of arsonists out there.

[TailingsPond + 1,029]

3 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Some believe that “Big Oil” should be held financially accountable for climate-related disasters, such as California’s wildfires. Their rationale? Major oil and gas companies are profitable and have contributed significantly to atmospheric carbon emissions.

I didn't write the article Ecocharcher misunderstood; you seem to have also misunderstood it.  Where was profit mentioned exactly?

FYI forest fires are natural and are net-carbon neutral.  The new trees that grow suck up the pollution their parents made. 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by TailingsPond