Highest Rated Comments

RevealNews7 karma

Ah, well there are a *lot* of really smart, committed, passionate people working hard to turn the tide, inside and out of companies and other institutions, coming up with innovative solutions and pushing for change. The latest report from international climate scientists says that while we are not on track to avert disaster, and it will take massive, dramatic, immediate action, it’s not too late either: https://www.npr.org/2022/04/04/1090577162/climate-change-un-ipcc-report

RevealNews6 karma

Do I have hope that reporting will cause some positive change! Yes, there’s always hope! That’s why we do what we do. But of course, it’s never a sure thing, and sometimes these things take a long time to have an effect. Sometimes it’s not the company that responds right away, but other actors – workers, customers, activists, shareholders, regulators, lawmakers – who then put the pressure on to change. There’s already been some impact on working conditions: https://revealnews.org/article/amazons-warehouse-quotas-have-been-injuring-workers-for-years-now-officials-are-taking-action/ Shareholders are voting on some workplace and environmental issues coming up next month. So the question is how Amazon will respond to all of this pressure and scrutiny.

RevealNews5 karma

That’s a public perception question and it probably really depends on what people you’re talking about and how they think about climate change, the role of corporations, the use of lawsuits, etc. What do *you* think? (Also, I’ll just throw this out there, a new documentary series on the fossil fuel industry’s culpability for where we are now: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/)

RevealNews4 karma

Good question. This is all standardized through the GHG Protocol, which many companies follow (and Amazon says it does) to account for carbon emissions (https://ghgprotocol.org/). It’s definitely true that a company like Amazon would count some emissions that a supplier to Amazon would count as well. Same idea as companies counting the emissions from the electricity they use, and those emissions also getting counted by the companies that generate the electricity. It serves a purpose because all of those companies are jointly responsible, and, in the case of a supply chain, a retailer can put pressure on suppliers to account for and reduce their emissions and that benefits the carbon footprints of both the suppliers and the retailers (and the world).
What you can’t do is add up every company’s footprint and determine that’s the overall emissions for a particular country or region - that doesn’t work because of the double counting. But for companies disclosing, there is no penalty for having a bigger footprint – it just means accurately measuring a company’s risk and responsibility.

RevealNews2 karma

I’ll leave it to the IPCC to answer that one. Here’s the latest report, with the good and the bad: https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/04/04/ipcc-ar6-wgiii-pressrelease/ In short, “It’s now or never.”