Published in La Tribune, April 2, 2026
On February 19th and 20th, the trial against TotalEnergies regarding its duty of climate vigilance took place. During the hearing, which featured a succession of expert witnesses, the proceedings focused on the oil company’s responsibility for climate change. This raises the question: what are our responsibilities regarding climate change?
Multiple Roles
We impact the climate through our decisions regarding consumption, investment, work, transportation, and voting. Fewer greenhouse gases will be emitted if we take the train instead of flying, if we fund wind and solar energy rather than fossil fuels, if we choose to build a career at EDF rather than TotalEnergies, or if we support phasing out coal. The challenge lies in assigning the greenhouse gas emissions associated with each decision. What is the contribution to global warming made by the consumer, investor, worker, and citizen within each of us?
The question also applies to companies. TotalEnergie’s activities benefit its shareholders, employees, subcontractors, and consumers. What is each person’s responsibility in TotalEnergie’s operations? One might also ask about the responsibility of the company itself. It extracts and refines oil but does not consume (or consumes very little) of this oil, which, moreover, would not be produced to be sold to car drivers if other companies did not bring cars to market. Automakers are therefore complicit and guilty. TotalEnergie exists thanks to its employees, investors, and consumers.
The emissions from a barrel of oil throughout its lifecycle must be shared. They cannot be attributed exclusively to the company that extracted the oil (TotalEnergie), nor to the one who burns it (the driver), nor to the one who ensures it can be used as an energy source for transportation (the automaker). Similarly, the government has a role to play in providing carbon-free transportation alternatives and infrastructure. Emissions would be lower with trains that run on time and bike paths rather than roads.
Saving and consumption
Nevertheless, individual climate responsibility varies greatly, particularly depending on income. A striking statistic cited by Nobel Prize-winning economist Esther Duflo illustrates this: the richest 10% of the global population is responsible for 50% of emissions, compared to just 10% of emissions for the poorest half of the population. She draws on a study by economist Lucas Chancel, who, to obtain this result, adds the carbon footprint of private investments to that of consumption. In other words, everyone is responsible for both the emissions resulting from their financial investments and what they consume. As a result, the carbon footprint of a liter of gasoline produced by TotalEnergies is attributed to both its shareholders and its customers. If we distinguish between the consumer and the saver within each of us, the data changes. In the United States, the wealthiest 10% are responsible for 24% of emissions based on their consumption, and 50% when their investments are taken into account.
Even though it is difficult to assign individual responsibility for climate change to each of us, the fact remains that our decisions regarding consumption, investment, work, transportation, and voting influence the climate. Admittedly, the impact of any single person is negligible. Nevertheless, since climate change is anthropogenic, humanity as a whole bears responsibility for it. It is “all of our business,” to borrow the phrase from one of the NGOs involved in the TotalEnergies lawsuit. On June 25, 2026, we will learn to what extent the Paris court considers this to be TotalEnergies’ business as well.
Photo: engin akyurt onUnsplash
