Is this Greenpeace report real science or just fluff enviro-marketing of its own persuasion? Do they even bother to weight their "award" recipients by size differentials across years? 

For instance, they punish Nintendo, but is that punishment dynamic or staitc based on Nintendo's growth? It would be ideal for Nintendo to have been able to hit their stated reduction targets, but if they double in size then of course things are going out the window. Otherwise you're comparing the effluent output of a single-celled organism against that of something truly complex, for instance a male cow or bull.

I guess the enviro-marketeers still work both sides of the aisle.

YOU!!! YES YOU!!! STAND STILL LADDY! 

And don't breathe or fart... As this will surely cause global warming... And the end of the world. lol