Big traditional corporates to go green and some have failed their pledge ongoing green - https://good-with-money.com/2020/09/21/wealth-emissions-gap-shock-as-burberry-goes-green/
I don’t buy into the idea that the dreaded “1%” have simply released twice as much CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) as the rest of us.
We need to break that down. Are they lumping up all the industrial infrastructure that the “one-percenters” manage? Well, then we’re all beneficiaries from it, and as a result, guilty.
Besides, (and I am no denier of human-driven climate change) I don’t think the solution is to simply halt our economy until it fits a utopic quota of emission. That will first and foremost impact us drastically and potentially push us into poverty, and secondly, it will face substantial back-lash so it’s not a practical solution to just “demand” no emission.
The only effective way to cut down on emissions is by investing in people. As people become more affluent they tend to care for their environment. Great minds will produce systems of higher efficiency and wealthier people will be able to fund them and make use of their products. All of that boils down to improving the living standards of people, really. That is how people become wealthier, smarter and more caring towards the ecosystem.
As a side-note, alternative energy sources (the likes of wind and solar) take a tremendous time before they pay off their carbon footprint. With the exception of nuclear, which is arguably our greatest contemporary option.
One answer is to consume less overall. One way to do that which is rarely talked about as it is politically sensitive is to reduce the population of the planet. That can be done over generations if we all take responsibility for how many new humans we produce. It does present problems in itself as you would start to reduce the younger population as the population on average gets older.
Various studies have been done about this and the time taken for a wind turbine to payback its carbon emissions taking in to account the carbon intensive fuels it replaces can be less than a year.
It’s one way (and a good way), not the only way
There will be no such thing as 0% in the next 10-15 years, however, the aim is to get there and by slowing decreasing. To be clear it is better to invest in a company that Is trying to reduce it’s emissions even if it has reduced by 5% than a company that doesn’t.