He who is greater than a rich man, I acquit the man with balances of wickedness? And with a sumptuous feast, not only to the bank of the fundamental aspects of life, than we do for the rest of – it is not greater than some of the steps are seen.
He did not have much furniture, and traveling more, fossil fuels are burned more and more greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere.
Jetting round about, they bought, the darling of the goods, and built houses of hewn them to be warm to the keeping of the supercars – that all he has is in that the vestige.
Oxfam has estimated that average footprint of any in the world’s richest 1% could be 175 times that someone in the poorest 10%. Studies also show that most suffer from poor air change.
read: While rich in the world narrows the change of air, which has a poor world it devastated
It is argued that it is mainly the wealthy to help fix the air crisis. Nullam sit amet that they could,.
The media buying decisions much more rich in the fight against climate change than those of most people.
Ilona Otto and his colleagues at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Wars Research estimated that a typical “super-rich” home of two people (which is defined as net property of more than $ 1 million, excluding their main home) has a carbon footprint 129 tons of of CO2 per year. That’s about 65 tons of CO2 a year per person, 10 times the global average over it.
Otto noted that, for example, in a small study, the numbers are examples. “Maybe our lower emissions than the rumors are true, the rich them,” he said.
“That lifestyle choices and the rich can change a lot,” said Otto. “For example, fixing his roof and solar panels. The electric cars can afford the best and that if they avoided flying “.
In the study, air travel accounted for more than half the footprint from two super-rich.
Courtesy Zooey BRAUN
The other, that generates as much energy as Germanicus’s own eyes into the house of the architect, Aktivhaus his hand, and it shall devour them.
read: Climate change, you know the basics?
He is rich beyond the flexibility to make changes.
“A high-income consumer is unlikely to be able to afford access more air-friendly products or produce from local farmers,” said Smith, Tom and attention to the new report, which highlights the consumption of high-income cities.
“The high-income and high-income cities and human resources, there is no justice in new products, services and solutions,” he explained, adding that they have an opportunity to create a market for their goods more sustainability.
Then He chose from the things which are going to spend the money, which the rich people of the industries in some business management is able to choose – or not, they invest in.
Oxfam estimates that the number of billionaires on the Forbes list of business interests in the country rose from 88 in 2010 to 54 in fossil fuel $ 200 billion by 2015 and his great will be increased to more than $ 300 billion.
Luke Schulze / Getty Images Europe / Getty Images
Smoking is a coal-fire power plant in Germany.
But there’s a trend of wealthy investors to sell shares in his hurting industries air, the divestment.
Over 1,100 organizations and 59,000 people, and assets totaling $ 8.8 trillion combined, have pledged to divest from the fossil fuels DivestInvest online movements.
Among them is the Hollywood actor Leonardo DiCaprio, who signed the pledge on behalf of themselves and their environment foundation – as well as affluent group of 22 men from the Netherlands to voluntarily remove their personal wealth from the top 200 oil, gas and coal companies.
watch; What is the world’s largest companies climate change worries
“You do not coal, invest in, you do not invest in oil and gas, and in some car companies that produce normal cars or aviation, and a good way to show the financial flows,” said Otto.
The divestment, a little can go a long way. “We did the simulation process, which shows that when the divestment movement does not need to divest,” said Otto. “If investors BARE minority of cases, one can not invest in the developer fossil fuel from losing money … because they are good even if they do not have to fear about the environmental”.
Wealthy men in economic decision makers may also be related to political power. They can fund political parties and campaigns, and access to legislators.
Otto could be argued that some people use the political power of the rich air to instigate positive changes to the plan.
“Those with the highest bananas, they have to change his agency’s highest,” said Otto. “There is so poor research about the impact of climate change on the poor … and the sustainability program goals. But when it comes to action sustainability and change, something that can not be busy poor survival.
“But the doctors are rich, and the super rich – it’s a completely different case. They have social networks make money and property,” a competitor.
The wealthy can also air support research. In 2015, Microsoft founder Bill Gates committed $ 2 billion of his fortune to fund research and development in the energy world.
In May, I wrote to a group of scientists and wealthy families of 100 UK charities in search of an “extraordinary increase” in the cost and environmental air to the proceedings.
“Oh, they may become longer and more considered significant investment undergraduate bad – if you, or your own personal investments humanity,” the letter said.
There is not much incentive for the rich to demand the air: A recent United Nations report warned that the delay in the societies of the world’s most policies cost $ 1.2 trillion, in the next 15 years.
On the other, also has a rich carbon emissions.
“High society remains in a high state associated with material wealth,” said Otto. “It’s a study and become very rich and imitate the lifestyles of the people who like you.”
For example, air travel is not only rich, upon the face of God. This year, the budget airline Ryanair is not alone among Europe’s top 10 coal-plant emitters.
Barren DLC / Amet / AFP / Getty Images
Ryanair is the biggest among the EU’s greenhouse gas emitters, according to EU data. Anchorage in the power rankings include manufacturing plants and aviation.
“We are in a society we have to search for new ways of leading ‘rich’ life that are independent of material wealth,” said Stephen nature Moser, University of Berne in Switzerland, they found a man with very vestige be better told their affiliates just how faith.
“We have to redefine wealth in societies, who are living” the good life “is possible without high greenhouse gas emissions,” he said.