undefined | Better HN

0 pointsagar4y ago0 comments

Why are you throwing out numbers like that while complaining about other people's unsourced information?

You are also using a strawman argument. I said people should focus on areas of great impact, not "nobody has to do anything." I'm beginning to think you are not interested a credible discussion.

This link refutes your assertion of ExxonMobil (they are responsible for 1.68% of global emissions), as well as answering why "the peasants pay renewable energy tax."

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/08/companies-highest-c...

> Exxon Mobil, which accounted for 1.98% of global emissions, the sixth highest percentage, ranked ninth among the top spending oil and gas companies, according to an OpenSecrets analysis of the IPCC report. The company’s PAC contributed $1.1 million to federal candidates in 2020, 78% of which went to Republicans. It also contributed $165,000 to other PACs and party committees last year, 97% of which went to Republican groups.

0 comments

whatever14y ago

A source (opensecrets) that is claiming as a source itself(opensecrets analysis). You win.

agarOP4y ago

Wow, you really have to question your motivations when you're defending Exxon's climate change contribution. But OK, I'll play that game.

The IPCC was the source for the OpenSecrets statement (as they said in the quote). They just consolidated the information. Feel free to read the IPCC Report yourself.

Or The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...

(Table shows ExxonMobile at 1.98%)

Or Statistica: https://www.statista.com/statistics/531354/greenhouse-gas-em...

Or Sustainability Now: http://sustainabilitynow.com/Docs/exxons_climate_footprint.p...

> The contribution of emissions from ExxonMobil to total carbon dioxide concentrations above pre-industrial levels in 2002 was 4.8 to 5.5%. This percentage contribution from ExxonMobil has steadily increased, rising from 0% in 1882, to 2.5 to 2.8% in 1960 and then almost doubling in the last forty years to 4.8 to 5.5% in 2002. The contribution of methane emissions is smaller, peaking at 1.6% of total global concentrations above pre-industrial levels, in 2002.

whatever14y ago

One might question your ability to do basic research and a division.

ExxonMobil reports 120M tons of CO2 per year [1]

Our total anthropogenic emmissions according to IPCC, EPA and other credible scientific organizations are close to 35B tons of CO2 per year [2].

You can also calculate it by using the concentration of CO2 and the total volume of air on earth. But I guess this is out of your league.

Now divide 35B with 120M. You will get 0.0034. That is 0.34%.

One piece of advice. Don’t become a researcher. Keep posting on HN.

[1] https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/Global/Files/energy...

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsagar4y ago0 comments

Why are you throwing out numbers like that while complaining about other people's unsourced information?

You are also using a strawman argument. I said people should focus on areas of great impact, not "nobody has to do anything." I'm beginning to think you are not interested a credible discussion.

This link refutes your assertion of ExxonMobil (they are responsible for 1.68% of global emissions), as well as answering why "the peasants pay renewable energy tax."

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/08/companies-highest-c...

0 comments

whatever14y ago

A source (opensecrets) that is claiming as a source itself(opensecrets analysis). You win.

agarOP4y ago

Wow, you really have to question your motivations when you're defending Exxon's climate change contribution. But OK, I'll play that game.

The IPCC was the source for the OpenSecrets statement (as they said in the quote). They just consolidated the information. Feel free to read the IPCC Report yourself.

Or The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...

(Table shows ExxonMobile at 1.98%)

Or Statistica: https://www.statista.com/statistics/531354/greenhouse-gas-em...

Or Sustainability Now: http://sustainabilitynow.com/Docs/exxons_climate_footprint.p...

whatever14y ago

One might question your ability to do basic research and a division.

ExxonMobil reports 120M tons of CO2 per year [1]

Our total anthropogenic emmissions according to IPCC, EPA and other credible scientific organizations are close to 35B tons of CO2 per year [2].

You can also calculate it by using the concentration of CO2 and the total volume of air on earth. But I guess this is out of your league.

Now divide 35B with 120M. You will get 0.0034. That is 0.34%.

One piece of advice. Don’t become a researcher. Keep posting on HN.

[1] https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/Global/Files/energy...

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse