The Middle Way?

At the time of the Paris Accord, the focus was clearly on the distnction between rich, polluting nations and their poorer, less-polluting counterparts. This is still an important consideration. New analysis suggests, however, the current inequality in 'greenhouse gas' emissions is largely between rich and poor individuals within particular countries (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/revealed-huge-climate-impact-of-the-middle-classes-carbon-divide). It isn't only the super rich, who are the source of the climate problem (although their extravagant lifestyles produce massive emissions). The world's richest 10% actually encompasses most of the middle classes in all developing countries. Someone is in the top 10%, if they earn more than the equivalent of $40,000 (£32,000) per year. As a group, that 10% is responsible for 50% of carbon dioxide emissions. This may, of course, not be a totally fair comparison. Stripping out the top 1%, would give a better indication of the emissions impact of the 'middle classes'. It seems likely, however, that failing to account for this within-country divide, generates much of the 'backlash' over the 'affordability' of climate actions. This would include demonstrations against fuel price increases in France and the antipathy to extendng charging for London's Ultra-Low Emissions Zone. The financially-stretched, worry about the viability of their current lives. Survival makes planning ahead, a relative luxury. Things have to be fairer. Polluters should pay proportionately but all governments favour their relatively wealthy.