When I was in elementary school, the cafeteria switched to disposable plastic trays because the paper ones hurt trees. Stupid, I know… but are today’s initiatives any better?

  • UndoLips@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    A lot of the initiatives are ineffective by design because the real goal is to give the consumers agency over the problem. Corporations have known that individual effort is a drop in the bucket but by framing the problem as not not a “corporate” problem but a “society” problem, they can keep not fixing it, for profit.

    • JasSmith@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      BP created the concept of a carbon footprint to make customers feel responsible for climate change. The reality is that consumer choices make no difference in the face of China building a dozen new giant coal power plants each year. This needs to be tackled diplomatically, and nations need to be willing to negotiate with much more force. China emits more than double the CO2 of the U.S. That’s just CO2. There’s PFAS, methane, plastics, and hundreds of others pollutants. They’re destroying whole oceans with their huge bottom-trawling fishing fleets. It’s time we get serious about tackling the major polluters first.

    • theinspectorst@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      A corporate problem and a societal problem are two sides of the same coin. Corporations don’t make money in isolation, they make money because they sell things that (directly or ultimately) are bought by consumers.

      You could choose to imagine a scenario where the CEOs of Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, etc just voluntarily decide to stop extracting oil overnight, and think that would be more impactful than billions of individual consumers slashing their demand for carbon-intensive products and fuels. But if the consumers don’t change their behaviour and continue to demand this stuff, other companies would just step in to fill the gap, takeover the old oil fields, etc.

      The sustainable way to change corporate behaviour is through changing their end-consumers’ behaviour - i.e. if end-consumers stop directly buying carbon-intensive products and stop buying from carbon-intensive companies.

      • demesisx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The MOST sustainable way to change corporate behavior is to make it prohibitively expensive for them to engage in behavior that is bad for the environment by levying major financial penalties and taxes on the offending corporations.

      • 80085@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Corps frame it as an individualist problem because they don’t want regulation, which is really the only viable way to attack the problem (and regulations needs to be backed by treaties with teeth since it is a global problem).

        You can’t expect every consumer to research every product and service they buy to make sure these products were made with an acceptable footprint. And if low-footprint products/services are more expensive or somehow not quite as good, there will be a financial incentive to use higher footprint products (if individuals acted “rationally,” this is what they would do).

        • theinspectorst@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Consumers are also voters. Corporations are not. Whether through the products we purchase at the shops or the politicians we elect at the ballot box, it will be the behaviour of individuals that creates the incentive set within which corporations profit-maximise.

          Telling ourselves that this is a corporate problem and our individual behaviour doesn’t matter is a comforting fairy tale but it will accomplish little.

    • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those companies pollute to produce goods and services that individuals buy.

      What does holding corporations accountable look like if not refusing to give them our money while advocating for regulation?

      Throwing your hands in the air, doing nothing to change your destructive habits and just saying “but corporations” isn’t gonna help anything.

      • e-ratic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is a frustrating kind of defeatist attitiude I’m finding is getting more and more common.

        It comes from a place of unwillingness for personal and habitual change. It’s hard to accept that we all have to change our lifestyles and accept that how we’re living is going to have to change. That there is exists some scenario whereby we all continue living exactly how we’re doing now with the same consumer behaviour and expect a bit of regulations to change everything. Or delay changing until after these regulations are in place, when in reality BOTH needs to happen.

        What’s the point in sitting on your ass complaining about the behaviours of other individuals and organisations when the only thing you have direct control over is your life.

        • Digitalprimate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          What’s the point in sitting on your ass complaining about the behaviours of other individuals and organisations when the only thing you have direct control over is your life.

          I’m not challenging you on the “sitting on your ass” part because that is true. But I promise you the Earth getting hotter and more polluted is going to exert “direct control …over your life.” And the only real way we can change this is through some kind of political process.

          • e-ratic@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where did I say it shouldn’t be a political process? It isn’t an either-or. How many people online who are saying “oh why should I consume less when corporations emit the most CO2, there’s no point I’m not going to bother” is politically active outside of voting? As in, physically - attend climate rallies or petition their local representative. I’d wager it’s a slim minority. Signing an online petition or tweeting does not count.

            If people honestly cared so much that they’re doing these things anyway, then changing themselves and their consumption habits should be dead easy. So why don’t more people do it?

            My point is this isn’t an excuse to not take any actions locally within your life, which is something you can do RIGHT NOW.

            • Maya_Weiss@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I assume that folks are just looking for a way to keep their comfort zone the same. Finding an excuse is simple, even without blatant logic errors.