> This "blame the consumer" bullshit has been happening since cigarettes... And it is bullshit.

Except that fuel is not literally addictive; it actually provides for some pretty basic needs for most people.

> These large corporations, controlled by a relatively small number of _people_ have a disproportionate and coordinated impact on the environment that outstrips anything the average person can do.

> They need to be held accountable, like we have done to other polluters and entities that have threatened public safety and security in our communities and society.

You might have point in some areas, but not demand for/use of fossil fuels. That is truly a democratic environmental problem.

It’s worse than addictive, it’s requisite for live in many parts of the US. That didn’t happen by accident.

> It’s worse than addictive, it’s requisite for live in many parts of the US. That didn’t happen by accident.

Yeah, because people prefer and choose to use modern, energy-intensive technology.

It's not like the oil companies forced cars or HVAC systems on people who didn't want them. What actually happened was people wanted to drive cars and live in warm homes without spending months chopping wood, and that created a lot of demand for fossil fuels.

> This "blame the consumer" bullshit has been happening since cigarettes... And it is bullshit.

You see this with recycling plastics as well. YOUR fault for not tossing the yogurt container in the right bin.

That one apparently was a scam the whole time.

the "large corporations" thing is bullshit too. that list that goes around of "these 100 companies are responsible for 99% of emissions" or whatever the percentage is, all the companies on that list are oil companies. but they aren't the ones burning the oil, they're the ones selling it.

individuals can't absolve themselves of responsibility by blaming the corporations that they buy their petroleum products from.

Consumer demand is not something that just appears. Demand for oil has largely been induced by decades of urban, housing and transportation planning centered around the automobile. E.G I do not want a car; I don’t like driving and maintaining one is expensive, but I don’t have a viable alternative for many trips I need to make.

Planning according to policies set in large part by auto and oil lobbyists.

You fail to understand the years of marketing, r&d, lobbying and outright anticompetitive practices these companies have been unleashing to "sell more product".

If we had any meaningful regulation, these companies would be forced to begin paying for their products' impacts on climate.

Poor analogy. Unlike cigarettes, we actually do need energy. Given antipathy toward nuclear and scale-up issues with renewables, fossil fuels have been the only scalable option over the last decades.

I wasn't comparing oil to cigarettes in terms of products, sorry if that's how it came across.

I was comparing the practice of large corporations who are actually to blame for societal problems deflecting that blame down to the end user.

I'm not sure if I agree with you here. I don't know of a single smoker who actually blames the cigarette manufacturer.

You could argue prohibition was good because it drove all of those "evil" profiteering alcohol companies out of business, but at the end of the day the consumer demand was still there.

What pollution do you want to hold them accountable for exactly? Surely not the pollution created by the end users consumption.

Your comment makes it sound like you’re ok with the the oil companies and corporations just ceasing operations