Paper in Nature Climate Change journal reveals major role wealthy emitters play in driving climate extremes
The world’s wealthiest 10% are responsible for two-thirds of global heating since 1990, driving droughts and heatwaves in the poorest parts of the world, according to a study.
While researchers have previously shown that higher income groups emit disproportionately large amounts of greenhouse gases, the latest survey is the first to try to pin down how that inequality translates into responsibility for climate breakdown. It offers a powerful argument for climate finance and wealth taxes by attempting to give an evidential basis for how many people in the developed world – including more than 50% of full-time employees in the UK – bear a heightened responsibility for the climate disasters affecting people who can least afford it.
“Our study shows that extreme climate impacts are not just the result of abstract global emissions; instead we can directly link them to our lifestyle and investment choices, which in turn are linked to wealth,” said Sarah Schöngart, a climate modelling analyst and the study’s lead author.
You are probably one of the wealthiest 10%.
It’s like calling a high school gym teacher a “professional athlete” or someone with an associate degree 'Highly educated."
I know a nurse who flies ten times a year. All her trips combined don’t add up to the fuel a private jet burns on one trip.
Moreover, she’d happliy use high speed rail if that were an option.
Flying once very likely puts you in that top 10%. Remember, the bottom 50% are subsistence farmers from Africa etc. living on like $1000/year.
deleted by creator
That’s not as true as it used to be…
And that shows that even the top 10% isn’t a problem.
It’s not like any group is perfect, the poorest in India and China still use very inefficient coal stoves/heaters, some even use dung. That has an oversized effect on glacier melt due to particulate deposit which goes on to exacerbate climate change.
It makes zero sense to try and start with normal first world citizens while ignoring it still literally doesn’t matter because the wealthiest are doing so much.
Like, putting it the average first world citizen to make them feel like that could fix it is literally fossil fuel propaganda…
Did you know that when you repeated it?
Not just with emissions but plastic recycling too:
https://climateintegrity.org/news/view/not-just-climate-big-oil-lied-about-plastic-recycling-too-and-must-be-held-accountable
Best case scenario here. You’ve fallen head over heels for corporate propaganda…
2.9C is still really bad though, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to say.
That it’s less than half of the 1% and less that a fourth of the 0.1%…
What I didn’t go I to was a lot of what’s counting against the top 50% is global shipping, which these days they have no control over.
People in the first world buying cheap plastic junk made in the third world aren’t doing it because it’s cheaper, these days it’s still expensive and often the only available option.
Like, why are people having difficulty in 2025 understanding that this shit is just so the 99% fight each other instead of uniting against the people who are actually the problem?
You misunderstand these values. The say “if everyone would pollute, like the top …” But when you have 10 people emitting 1% of all emissions and 1000 people emitting 10% of all emissions, you wont get the emissions down to a sustainable level, unless you also address the emissions of the 1000 people.
It doesn’t matter for the climate change, who or how many people emit, just how much it is in total. I agree that those who emit disproportionately also need to pay more to fix it.
Kthnx but what I said is factually correct w.r.t. the article.
If you have a problem with the use of the 10% grouping then take it up with the authors of the paper.