3412
submitted 1 year ago by whoami@lemmy.world to c/196
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] whoami@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Is that methodology also how the CDP works? I am looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_contributors_to_climate_change#All_cause_1+3_cumulative_emissions_[8] in particular, and the figures aren't looking ridiculously better still.

Or is that the difference between the Scope 1+3 tables and the All cause table in this page?

edit: Snopes has in fact written a fact check that corroborates the methodology used by CDP is potentially flawed for this exact reason. So it will not be accurate - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/corporations-greenhouse-gas/.

I'll defer to the following point by the original Twitter OP though, which I still think is valid: "The point I was trying to make is that any media coverage that reduces the issue to personal choices is incomplete, and [structural] issues should always be central to climate reporting," Johnson told us. "Individuals' choices are not unimportant. They just shouldn't be the focus of climate coverage."

tl;dr: Yes, personal responsibility and reducing one's carbon footprint is also very important, but there is chronic under-reporting on the other end of the equation.

[-] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The question is: should we stop reporting on how personal responsibility plays a part just because people think it's unfair? Isn't that straight out whataboutism?

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
3412 points (100.0% liked)

196

16243 readers
2144 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS