Critical Study Shows the Huge Gap in Emission Production Between the Rich 1% and the Poor

A study points to the enormous emissions difference between the top 1% and the lowest. According to research, the "polluting elite" is responsible for the same amount of carbon dioxide in a year as the lowest 10% were in the previous two decades.

(Photo : Getty Images)

Recent Research

According to recent research, the UK's top 1% of income produces the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions in a single year as the lowest 10% for more than two decades.

The results demonstrate the stark differences in carbon footprints between the bulk of people, even in industrialized nations, and what has been dubbed "the polluting elite," whose high-carbon lifestyles feed the climate problem.

Before the Covid-19 epidemic and lockdowns, which halted high-carbon activities like flying, the time covered by the dataset ended in 2018.

Also Read: Levels of Greenhouse Gases in the Atmosphere Reaches New High

Huge Gap

According to Autonomy, the UK could have earned roughly £126 billion by now by taxing carbon emissions from just the top 1% of income categories, which could have been used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a fair manner, such as by insulating homes for lower-income people.

The huge gap has to be closed, according to Peter Newell, a professor of international politics at the University of Sussex who was not part of the Autonomy study but has done considerable research on the "polluting elite."

The gap between rich and poor earnings regarding greenhouse gas emissions is not unique to the UK. There is rising evidence that there is a "polluting elite" whose lives are very different from those of the bulk of people. This is true for established and developing nations, where the poorest often contribute very little to greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, the richest have an influence equivalent to that of the top 1% of wealthy nations.

The carbon footprints of the wealthiest people are significantly bigger due to factors including flying, driving big, costly automobiles, having numerous properties and moving between them, eating a diet heavy in meat imports, purchasing more clothing, and shopping for imported luxury items. Poorer individuals typically utilize public transportation, live in modest homes near their homes, and spend less money on luxuries and products like "quick fashion."

"The tremendous release of carbon emissions by the very wealthy in society over the past few decades is stunning," said Will Stronge, head of research at Autonomy. According to our findings, the government should adequately tax the wealthy through a well-targeted carbon tax program to combat climate change.

Taxes on the dirtiest activities could only be levied against the wealthy and wouldn't have to worsen the cost-of-living issue for most people. They may also fill the gaping gap in the UK's public finances.

However, despite these activities' adverse environmental effects, the government has chosen to lower its taxes.

Need Immediate Action

Stronge claimed that if the government doesn't address the reality that the wealthy are disproportionately to blame for the climate catastrophe, most people's efforts, such as turning off lights to conserve energy, will be ineffective.

"Last year, the Green party called for the UK to demonstrate true global leadership by adopting a carbon price at Cop26," said Adrian Ramsay, co-leader. This paper shows how such a tax may be crucial for accelerating the shift to a cleaner, greener economy.

The top 1% of UK earnings should pay a wealth tax since they are disproportionately responsible for a significant part of the country's greenhouse gas emissions. A modest tax on the wealthiest 1% of households might collect in the neighborhood of £70 billion, which could be used to pay a large portion of a national program for home insulation, resulting in warmer, more pleasant houses and permanent bill reductions. The poorest 10% of the population, who are least to blame for the UK's carbon emissions, will especially profit from such a levy.