Oddly enough, without changing buying habits or consumer demand, I think the Amazon truck is a superior option.

• Instead of thousands of individual trips to the store for small things, a single vehicle delivers everything
• Instead of many hyper-local stores packed with things that may or may not eventually be sold, only things that have been purchased are shipped and transported

The trick, as you said, is to change consumer behavior and people balk at doing that, especially when it will cost more and income inequality hits harder than ever. Tax the rich, level the playing field, and the rest gets much easier.

I'm not demanding products which harm the environment made using methods which harm the environment. Businesses make the choice to produce those things instead of carbon-neutral environmentally friendly products, so they are more at fault than the individual who buys the thing. It's extremely difficult for an individual to be able to uncover the environmental implications of everything you buy and do. The only real solution is to pass laws which properly account for the harmful externalities in the production cost, such as carbon tax. That will steer both businesses and consumers towards more sustainable decisions.

Be real mate. Thats not how it works.

Suppliers create the demand.

People werent demanding smartphones before smartphones got invented.

Most new things are shunned by most people until they slowly gain popularity and then the demand starts to exist.

You are stating the hypothesis of capitalism whilst ignoring the conclusion.

"Voting with your dollar" is bullshit. Just stop buying oil? Ok, let me go to the no oil store and buy a new car that doesn't run on gas and isn't made with any plastic. Let me spend my entire 5 dollars worth of disposable income to buy a new vehicle. And then take that vehicle to the store that has 0 petroleum products. No cans lined with PFAS, no plastic bags, no plastic packaging, no products made entirely of plastic. Never fly again in your life, or take the bus. Don't you even think about eating out again. Live life as a hermit, make your own goods, provide your own services and maintinence to yourself to ensure an oil free existence. Better start soon too, the planets only getting hotter. Rinse and repeat x8,000,000,000.

Markets are driven by capital. Those with the most capital have the greatest influence. Your pittance of a wage isn't going to change a damn thing. 10% of the global population has 52% of the purchasing power. Even if the other 90% of us all united together at once, about a single thing, we still wouldn't have the purchasing power to overwhelm them. You can't reform a system that's made to perpetuate consumption and pollution. It's cheaper to pollute by design. Do you think it's a coincidence that bills meant to make polluting more expensive either don't get passed or are so rife with loopholes they're effectively useless? Pull your head out of your ass. If there was ever a time this shit show could be reformed, it's long gone.

While true that they're not polluting for fun, many corporations will try to avoid any anti-pollution measure that will lose them money. To the point where they spend billions of dollars every year to lobby governements, enviromental protection organizations, and drag out regulations with lawsuits. Because in the long run it's usually worth it for them to pollute, as long as the investors see enough profits in the short term.

The Amazon fleet is about 70,000 vehicles and they’re transitioning to electric right now.

They are not doing this because of the goodness of their heart. They are doing it because of $$$$. Gas costs more, so it's more economical to switch to electric.

Rest assured, if there are other places where it's more economical to strip mine the environment and increase the rate of climate change, they will switch to that cheaper method in a heartbeat, if they aren't already doing so.

Those companies are the reason that energy isn’t produced with cleaner alternatives like nuclear, wind, or solar

Billionaires and corporations lobby governments and donate to superPACs(legal bribery) to have them promote their business interests and protect their capital.

Infinite growth is not sustainable on a finite planet. The billionaires aren’t going to save us. Buying stuff is not going to save us. Neoliberalism and Capitalism is not going to save us.

If only we had some nationalized way to deliver parcels on an optimized route…

you do realize that I don’t buy stuff from Amazon and there are still Amazon trucks around right?

Sulfate emissions.

Which are bad, but are not CO2 emissions.

The entire shipping industry is a small fraction of the US's automobile emissions.

While true that total consumption is less than the rest of the population, billionaires have a very large influence and people try to mimic them. If they don't set an example and still fly everywhere in a private jet, those 1000x1000x1000x1000x people will also say f it, if a billionaire can't do it, I certainly can't.

you don’t know me buddy. I don’t use Amazon and I pretty much only drive to and from work. good fucking luck not giving Amazon money given that AWS hosts millions of companies websites.

/e ALSO top 0.1% isn’t a small enough group to address what I’m talking about. Try top 0.01%, that’s about where you’ll find billionaires.

According to your source, the top 1% emit 50 tonnes of CO2/capita/yr. The top 0.1% emit 200 tonnes of CO2/capita/yr. That is still an insane increase the wealthier one becomes.

Not saying that one should not try to limit their emissions (we definitely should stop buying stuff from amazon/big companies, if not to limit emissions, at least to break their monopolies), but there is definitely some low hanging fruit in that top percentage (e.g. having 800 people limit emissions is going to be harder when you have the same effect by just limiting the 8 at the top).

Also you're last sentence is quite hostile, BP definitely came up with it to avoid their responsibility and pivot it to other people. The idea might not be 'bad' per se, but if you do it so to avoid your own responsibility, it is definitely bad practice (which, again, is why each of us should try to limit our carbon emissions)