Not everyone pollutes in the same way. And this seemingly banal phrase hides a reality that makes even the most cynical scientists pale. Sarah Schongart ofInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis he coordinated a study published in Nature which is shaking the foundations of the entire debate on man's climate impact. The verdict? The richest 10% of the world's population is responsible for two-thirds of the global warming observed since 1990.
Environmental Inequality Laid Exposed
We are faced with a discrepancy so absurd that it calls into question the entire approach to the climate crisis. Because while asking everyone to make sacrifices is right, it is also true that the climate impact of some is so disproportionate that it creates a real issue of environmental justice.

Climate Impact: The Numbers You Can't Ignore
The results of the Research are shocking to say the least. We are talking about numbers that seem to come from a dystopian novel: the wealthiest 10% in terms of income (about 770 million people) is responsible for as much as 65% of the 0,61 degree Celsius temperature increase recorded between 1990 and 2020. But there is worse: the 1% at the top of the pyramid (about 63 million people) alone caused 20% of the increase, while the 0,1% is even richer contributed 8%. It makes me shudder to think that if we all lived like the poorer half of the planet, global temperatures would have increased marginally, almost imperceptibly.
If everyone on Earth emitted as much as the richest 10% of people, the temperature increase would be 2,9 degrees Celsius.

The issue becomes even more alarming when we analyze the personal carbon footprint. According to the data collected, the most privileged 1% emits 101 tons of CO2 equivalent per person per year, the richest 10% 29 tons, compared to the paltry 1,4 tons produced by the poorest half of the planet. To keep global warming under 1,5°C, we should all reduce our footprint to 1,9 tonnes per person by 2050. I would say that someone has already done their part. Someone else doesn't. You do the math.
The Ultra-Rich: A Walking Environmental Catastrophe
The problem is not only how much the super-rich consume (in the recent past, data has also been released on the exploitation of water), but how do they do it. One studio analyzed the impact of the most exclusive status symbols: the super-yachts. There are about 300 of them in the world, and each one devours over 120 million liters of oil per year, producing carbon dioxide emissions equal to 285 million kilos. The entire fleet of these billionaires' toys pollutes more than entire developing countries.
Do we want to talk about super-villas? Homes that exceed 2.300 square meters, with an average of 3.700 square meters and an average price of approximately 28 million euros. Their energy consumption is comparable to that of entire working-class neighborhoods.

But the icing on the cake is the private jets. In the US alone there are about 15.000 of them, flying for 17 million hours a year. In Europe, at the “recovery” after Covid (year 2022) have been registered 572.000 flights. The emissions produced by this fleet exceed those of the whole of Burundi. As highlighted Oxfam, who is in the top 1% by income On average, it pollutes in one year as much as a person belonging to the remaining 1.500% of humanity would pollute in 99 years. Do you need more data? No, right? Let's get to the heart of the matter.
Climate injustice hits the most vulnerable
The biggest joke? The richest are the main culprits of the climate crisis, but it is the poorest who suffer the most serious consequences. The effects of this climate impact disproportionately affects the most vulnerable populations, from children to inhabitants of regions already plagued by poverty and inequality.
The estimates are terrifying: the emissions for which the richest 1% of the planet is responsible could cause 1,3 million deaths due to the effects of global warming, most of them by 2030. A massacre that we could avoid with a radical change of direction.
Climate Impact: A Possible Solution?
Faced with this evidence, the idea of a progressive taxation on large estates. Carl Friedrich Schleussner, head of the IIASA climate program, states that If we fail to take into account the central role played by the richest people in climate protection policy, we risk overlooking “one of the most important levers for reducing future dangers”.
It's time to recognize it, we have to do it, because it is now a verified fact: the climate crisis is fundamentally a crisis of inequality. And the first step to solving it is to demand that those who pollute much more pay much more.