How Large Corporations contribute to Climate Change

Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of our time, with its devastating
effects being felt around the world. While individual actions can make a difference in
reducing carbon emissions, large corporations are responsible for a significant portion
of greenhouse gas emissions. The actions of these corporations have a significant
impact on the environment, and it is important to understand how they contribute to
climate change. Young adults will be responsible for our planet's future and that is why
it is essential to advocate for change and educate college students now before it is too
late.

Large corporations are responsible for a significant portion of global greenhouse gas
emissions. According to a report by the Carbon Majors Database, just 100 companies
are responsible for 71% of global greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. These
companies include fossil fuel producers such as ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP, as well as
large manufacturing and transportation companies. These emissions contribute to the
warming of the planet, leading to devastating effects such as rising sea levels, more
frequent natural disasters, and threats to global food security.

The contributions of large corporations to climate change are primarily driven by their
pursuit of profit. Many corporations prioritize their bottom line over environmental
concerns, resulting in unsustainable practices that contribute to greenhouse gas
emissions. For example, the agriculture industry is responsible for a significant portion
of global greenhouse gas emissions, with livestock production alone accounting for
14.5% of total emissions. Large corporations in the food industry prioritize profit over
sustainability, leading to unsustainable practices such as large-scale animal farming
and monoculture farming practices.

In addition to their direct contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, large corporations

also have an indirect impact on climate change through their supply chains. The Carbon
Majors Database report found that just 25 companies are responsible for over half of
global industrial emissions since 1988, largely driven by their supply chains. These
emissions are often attributed to the production of goods for these corporations, such
as steel, cement, and aluminum.

There are also instances where large corporations actively work to obstruct climate
action. In the United States, for example, fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil
have spent millions of dollars lobbying against climate legislation. This obstructionism
has contributed to a lack of meaningful climate action in many countries around the
world.
It is clear that large corporations have a significant impact on climate change, and it is
important to hold them accountable for their actions. Governments can play a role in
regulating the activities of large corporations, such as implementing carbon taxes or
incentivizing sustainable practices. Consumers can also make a difference by
supporting companies that prioritize sustainability and avoiding those that engage in
unsustainable practices.

However, it is also important to acknowledge that some large corporations are taking
steps to reduce their environmental impact. For example, Walmart has committed to
sourcing 50% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2025 and has implemented a
program to reduce food waste. Apple has committed to powering its operations with
100% renewable energy and has reduced its carbon footprint by 35% since 2015. These
actions show that large corporations can play a role in mitigating climate change.

Furthermore, some large corporations have recognized the importance of addressing

climate change and have made significant commitments to reduce their greenhouse
gas emissions. For example, Microsoft has committed to becoming carbon negative by
2030, meaning that it will remove more carbon from the atmosphere than it emits.
Amazon has committed to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2040 and has
ordered 100,000 electric delivery vehicles to help achieve this goal. These commitments
are an important step towards a more sustainable future.

In conclusion, large corporations are responsible for a significant portion of global

greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to the devastating effects of climate change.
These corporations prioritize their bottom line over sustainability, resulting in
unsustainable practices that contribute to emissions. However, it is also important to
recognize that some corporations are taking steps to reduce their environmental impact
and that these efforts should be encouraged and supported by consumers, fellow
corporations, and the government to help lead us in the right direction. It is the
responsibility of new generations to make the necessary changes for our planet and
that can start right here at App State.

Sources:

Griffin, P. (2017). The Carbon Majors Database CDP Carbon Majors Report 2017 100
fossil fuel producers and nearly 1 trillion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
https://b8f65cb373b1b7b15feb-
c70d8ead6ced550b4d987d7c03fcdd1d.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/cms/reports/
documents/000/002/327/original/Carbon-Majors-Report-2017.pdf?1499691240

TACKLING CLIMATE CHANGE THROUGH LIVESTOCK A Global Assessment of emissions

And mitigation opportunities. (n.d.). http://www.fao.org/3/i3437e/i3437e.pdf

Banerjee, N., Song, L., & Hasemyer, D. (2015, September 16). Exxon’s Own Research
Confirmed Fossil Fuels’ Role in Global Warming Decades Ago. Inside Climate News.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/16092015/exxons-own-research-confirmed-
fossil-fuels-role-in-global-warming/

Peer Review

Luke Jackson

The format of your editorial letter has a nice sense of flow, hitting the high points and
explaining the facts that you have researched. Focusing on how larger corporations
emit and add to climate change followed by how some big companies are attempting to
lessen their carbon footprint is a nice problem and solution ordering. In the beginning of
your letter, paragraphs two, three, and four, have some repetitive information and some
statements seem to be reworded. I would consolidate your paragraphs two and three
into one- they are talking about the same or very similar topics.
Do not forget to hyperlink your sources in your final draft.
Another pro about your editorial letter is you stuck with one level of organization,
meaning larger companies with similar sizes. This allows the reader to easily see what
you are talking about from one large company to the next. If you wanted to describe
some more of the effect fossil fuels or any other pollutants from big companies have on
the environment, it would help the reader see what kind of damage they do and to what
scale they affect the environment.
Overall, your editorial paper is well written and has all of the points I see it needs in
order to convey a strong argument.

Olivia Pound

I am super interested in your topic and find it to be an excellent choice for this project. I
noticed instantly before reading it that your paragraphs are similar in size and have a
very aesthetically pleasing look to it. This gives it a more professional look even before
reading it. The second paragraph was extremely well written and displays the facts in a
way that really makes a connection with the reader. Since most individuals know the
companies you listen to. I like how in paragraph three you stated an idea and then gave
an example. I think that helps the reader understand why you made the statement you
did. I also really liked the fact that not only did you say the large companies are the
problem but they are also preventing change from happening by using their profits. I
found it interesting that you are adding in the companies who do help and plan on
helping combat climate change. If there were one thing I would say about that section I
would say to add more of what companies have actually done rather than what they
plan on doing. I think it would be worth noting that a lot of companies make promises
and tell the media that they are going to make a change when they do not. I think adding
something like that would be beneficial in your editorial.
In the introduction I would recommend adding in a surprising statistic or
something to hook the reader. This is also nitpicking, but I would discard “these” before
the word companies or add specific companies you talk about throughout your editorial.
You definitely need to add hyperlinks within your editorial. The best way to do this is by
putting hyperlinks in statistics or smaller facts that you used. I think that ultimately my
main issue, not even that it is an issue, would be to add more about the large companies
combating climate change. I think this creates less bias throughout your editorial. This
would help the audience have a better understanding of both sides rather than a lot of
information as to how bad they are. Even if they are lol.
Overall, I think your editorial is extremely appealing to an outsider audience who
knows nothing about the topic. It is relatively easy to understand the difficult facts and
the explanations were beautifully written. You did a great job overall.

Part 1:
Please write 300ish words below reflecting on your process of composing this paper and what
you learned in that process. Address issues including (in no particular order) how completing a
peer review for your peer helped you revise your own project, how your peers’ feedback
helped you revise your project, how this project has helped you better understand how to
contribute to the conversation and write for a specific audience and in a specific genre (OpEd),
what you might still revise in your project if you were able to do it again, what about your
process of writing (brainstorming, drafting, revising, polishing) was helpful and what might you
change in the future about your process, and other points about your process that you think
are relevant for reflection. Be sure that you are primarily reflecting on your process of writing
and not only on what you learned about the content about which you wrote (although you can
address that also). Additionally, be sure you spend some time on this and be honest with
yourself. It is not enough to say “I didn't learn anything from my peer review” or “I didn’t learn
anything about contributing to the conversation and appealing to a specific audience”. You will
want to spend some time reflecting because you will be asked to use this reflection again at the
end of the weeks.

I thought the peer reviews were very helpful. Having to find things to critique about other
editorials made me think about elements of mine and what I could change. Approaching it with
the mindset of finding things to fix rather than if there is anything to fix is very helpful. It was
also nice to read the peer reviews of my editorial and gain more perspectives on my writing.
Sometimes I am reluctant to want to change things about my writing but peer reviews can be
very convincing. This editorial was very eye opening to me because it made me realize that I can
very easily speak up about climate justice and advocate for change. Part of my point in my
editorial was that it is my generation's responsibility to speak up and I don’t want to be a
hypocrite. If everyone wrote editorials and advocated to their peers I think a lot more would
get done. If I could go back and change the way I wrote this editorial I would find more research
to back my argument. By the time I found the ones that I used I was ready to begin writing but I
could have used more. Overall I thought I did pretty well writing and drafting my ideas and I
think my editorial was pretty good.

Part 2:
Please complete the self-assessment below, including the points and comments section.
Please spend some time on this and complete it honestly with points and comments. I will also
use this when I grade your final product.

Each section is worth 5 points:

5=excellent, 4=good but could be improved, 3=adequate but needs significant work, 2=doesn’t quite meet the
requirements and needs significant work, 1= does not meet any of the requirements.

Category and Goals Points Student Comments

Genre: 5/5 I think my editorial was well put together and hit expectations.
● Demonstrates
anticipation of genre
and audience
expectations in your
own writing.
● Demonstrates careful
research on the
genre chosen.
● Demonstrates
understanding of
genre of Op-Ed
and/or informative/
persuasive
interpretation.
 ● Demonstrates
creativity and critical
thinking
● Is sufficiently
developed.
● Shows effective use
of citations in
hyperlinks.
Rhetoric: 5/5 I think I built credibility and appealed to my audience
● Demonstrates of college students. I tried to keep the reading light on
understanding of data but enough to support my argument.
rhetorical situation
and audience needs
specific to the
platform/venue.
● Demonstrates aim
that adds to the
conversation and
informs the audience
of something they
might not know or
have thought about
in that way
● Appeals to audience
effectively using
emotional, logical,
and ethical appeals
● Builds credibility
effectively through
citations
(hyperlinked where
appropriate), logical
structure, and ethos.
Research: 4/5 I think I used good research but I could have found more to use.
● Uses sufficient
textual examples and
provides sufficient
evidence for claims
including scholarly
research
● Demonstrates
analysis of genre,
author/s, purpose,
audience, context,
sources, content
 level, format,
language and visuals.
● Uses sufficient
textual examples.
● Shows effective use
of citation
conventions
(hyperlinks and
works cited at the
end in field’s format)
Labor/Process: 5/5 I spent a decent amount of time drafting the editorial and going back
through to change things.
● participated in good
faith in the drafting,
peer review, revision,
and reflection
process and
submitted in a timely
manner
TOTAL: /20

Some good work here, Jake! Overall, I thought this was clear, but I would have liked to
see you revise this to better meet the genre requirements to appeal to a public
audience. I also tend to agree with your self-assessment here.
Best,
Dr. Walzer