Scientists Just Found Who's Causing Global Warming
By: Joe Wilkins (Futurism via Yahoo News)
Ready for the real shock? The study confirms that the true cause of increased carbon emissions is -- consumption. Affluence allows people to consume more. That's right, global trade is killing the planet. Seems that transporting plastic Barbie dolls 10,000 miles really does have an environmental consequence. Who didn't see this coming?
I have tried to find or compute some sort of estimate for how many of the world's wealthiest 10% reside in the United States. Collecting data for a more precise estimate would require more time and effort than I care to invest for a social media post. But a crude estimate (using AI and my own calculations) indicate that somewhere between 200 and 260 million of the world's wealthiest 10% reside in the United States. That means 59 to 76 percent of the US population are among the world's wealthiest 10%.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Are you sitting down? Because there's some news that might shock you.
A recent study published in the journal Nature Climate Change has found that the richest 10 percent of the world population are responsible for an astonishing two-thirds of observable climate warming since 1990. Basically, that small minority of the wealthiest among us contribute nearly seven times as much to extreme climate change as the entire lower-earning 90 percent of the planet.
If that's not enough to have you reaching for your pitchfork, the top 1 percent contribute 20 times as much to climate disasters as the bottom 99 percent. Since 2019, the research article notes, the "wealthiest 10 percent of the global population accounted for nearly half of global emissions" through "private consumption and investments, whereas the poorest 50 percent accounted for only one-tenth of global emissions."
The results were developed by fusing climate change models with economic data, which allowed researchers to zero in on rates of toxic emissions from various income groups throughout the globe. By linking climate change with the economy, they found the source of these emissions overwhelmingly skewed toward the top hoarders of wealth.
"If everyone had emitted like the bottom 50 percent of the global population, the world would have seen minimal additional warming since 1990," co-author Carl-Friedrich Schleussner said. "Addressing this imbalance is crucial for fair and effective climate action."
While the numbers are staggering, they're far from shocking at this point. In the United States, the top 1 percent of households control 80 percent of company assets — the average person reading this has no way of ending the coal industry's devastating reign over Appalachia, for example. That's a decision to be made by shareholders and executives looming over us from the top of the pyramid.
Rather, the article is just more confirmation of something we've known for years: the rich are the biggest threat to the climate by far. But while most studies on wealth and climate change hone in on consumption habits, this bit of research looks a little deeper under the hood at the system making this all possible.
Instead of simply arguing that rich people consume more than the average pauper — a verifiable fact, to be clear — these researchers studied emissions through the flow of public and private investments, as well as global trade. This gives a much more complete picture of the actual cause and effect of Earth-melting pollution, following the key source of power in our capitalist world: property.
The poorest among us, owning no factories, private jets, or oil rigs, are hardly a glimmer in the rearview mirror of the ultrarich as they race toward emission rates previously unseen by humankind. Climate change, being clearly tied to economic activity, is simply one of dozens of consequences of our chosen economic system — and as the old adage goes, "it all rolls downhill."
"To mainstream commerce, the Earth is both loot and dump," wrote climate journalist George Monbiot. "Commercial activity, broadly speaking, consists of extracting resources from a hole in the ground on one side of the planet, inducing people to buy them, then dumping them a few days later in a hole in the ground on the other side."
Look no further for evidence of this than the ultrarich themselves. Measuring their wealth in increasingly fractured portfolios and webs of corporate spending, those who do own the factories hide their role in the changing climate through tall tales of consumer responsibility: recycle your plastics, buy an electric car, and use paper straws.
Yet as the research clearly shows, none of these measures has a hope of making a dent in the grand scheme of climate emissions. Which isn't to say we shouldn't try — but that until the ultrawealthy are brought to heel, we have about as much chance of stopping climate change as BP has of stopping its next oil spill. That is, not very much at all.
Tags
Who is online
139 visitors
Here's another news article on the reported study. This article is more data rich and dense, providing more details for those who might be curious.
This article actually makes sense.
Thank you for posting it.
No one is causing global warming, the warming we are seeing is the natural warming from sea level rise which will eventually push the earth back into another ice age.
Quibbling over cause won't change the fact that the climate is changing. Removing climate change from the docket doesn't mitigate the environmental harm being caused by human exploitation of the planet for questionable commercial purposes. The landfills being created as a consequence of cheap, disposable consumer goods are quite real and can easily be found. Monoculture farming really is the practice of modern agribusiness and its effects on the natural environment are easy to see. Urban spread really is encroaching upon natural spaces with obvious effects on ecosystems.
The dollar is not backed by anything tangible. There is no need to destroy the environment to create more dollars. Joe Biden pulled more dollars out of his ass than could possibly be created by cutting down all the forests. The logging industry generates less than $20 billion in revenue each year; which wouldn't even blip the needle for the Federal deficit. But we must have sticks for corn dogs.
Actually it does need to be quibbled.
A recent study published in the journal Nature Climate Change has found that the richest 10 percent of the world population are responsible for an astonishing two-thirds of observable climate warming since 1990. Basically, that small minority of the wealthiest among us contribute nearly seven times as much to extreme climate change as the entire lower-earning 90 percent of the planet.
That right there claims that man is the cause and the remedy is the elimination of the ultra-rich a view of an eco-fascist.
The study claims that only 10 percent of man has caused global warming. But let's say you're right; the eco-fascists are just pulling a fast one for political power or to turn world communist.
That still doesn't absolve humans from acid rain, plastic contamination everywhere, PFAS pollutants in the blood of every living thing on the planet, depleted aquifers, stressed fish populations, mismanagement of forests, over grazing of public lands, and turning jungles into concrete parking lots. All those cargo ships spread shit everywhere. The eco-fascists aren't dumping so much cheap, disposable trash into landfills that new, bigger ones are constantly needed. The world's pinko commies didn't create industrial scale garbage collection.
If your neighbor was shitting on your lawn, I'd bet you'd be a little upset. Well that's what the wealthiest 10% of the world's population is doing; shitting on everyone's lawn. So, what's your answer? What do you think should be done about it?