We Should Help Our Top Corporations Embrace Sustainability
Obviously, a great deal of immorality exists in both our public and private sectors. Whether we’re talking about the purveyors of junk food, cigarettes, assault weapons, clothing made by children, or, more familiarly, oil and coal, it’s common for certain big corporations to behave badly, while buying favors from government to support their evil undertakings.
The question then becomes: What does one do about this? While there’s no easy answer, personally, I’m willing to help corporations change direction for the better, and, I’m happy to report, there are plenty that wish to do exactly that. I know Lockheed Martin builds war machines and coal processing equipment. But now they’re getting into renewable energy, and, with annual revenues of $47 billion, when they do something, they do it big. I have no compunction helping the Lockheed Martins of the world change their focus from destructive to constructive activities and products.
That’s why I took them up on their invitation and visited their facility in Virginia a few months ago in which they have (really cool) demonstrations of what they’re trying to get done in ocean thermal energy conversion and half a dozen other clean energy technologies. I sent them a few items from our list of clean energy investment opportunities, and they’re taking a long look at a few.
I have friends who can’t understand this, and say that I should stay away from historically bad actors. I’m not convinced; in fact, I don’t think that makes any more sense than the assertion that churches shouldn’t accept sinners.
I even have contacts at Dow Chemical. Historically, it doesn’t get much more morally obnoxious than Dow, unless you have some warped appreciation for agent orange and napalm, two products that caused countless thousands of agonizing deaths, while making their shareholders extremely wealthy over the last half century. But now, Dow wants to look to sustainability and eco-friendliness in the chemical industry, and they want my advice on how to get there. I’m happy to oblige.
If we stay away from the organizations that have the greatest potential to change the world for the better, we’re missing an important opportunity.
I’d be interested in readers’ viewpoints on the subject.
I agree whole heartedly with your viewpoint. Just because major companies produced vile products in the past really has nothing to do with the present. Sensibilities change with time and the vast resources of DOW or GE must be tapped for the future of mankind and leave the past where it deserves to be.
We’re starting to see solar prices come down to the point that they undercut electricity costs for coal-fired generation. Big industry can’t help but see that economic reality and start converting to clean sources. The fact that ALEC and other ultra-conservative protectors of entrenched interests want to legislate against such changes shows the threat clean energy suddenly poses to the status quo.
Big business definitely have been horrific abusers of the environment for a very long time, however they too see that they must change the course for their future energy demands, and should be embracing all types of renewable energy resources..
By the year 2100,the world will need to get about 90% of its power from non-CO2 emitting sources as developing nations strive to lift their people out of poverty thereby increasing the demand for power by about FOUR TIMES!! Of course we must do our share here in the U.S., but we must also recognize that even we got 90% of OUR power from non-CO2 emitting sources here in the U.S., it would matter very little unless the rest of the world did the same.
When I say that 90% of the power must come from non-CO2 emitting sources, that includes power for manufacturing, agriculture, heating, cooling, cooking, and transportation. That, in theory, could probably be done, but I see it as highly unlikely to happen. Instead, climates will change in ways that cannot be accurately predicted. Although the average temperature of the world will increase, it will not be uniform and some parts of the world will actually become cooler.
It must be understood that even if solar power were completely free, its intermittent nature is such that it cannot replace power from fossil fuels. To make it possible to phase out nuclear power, Germany is building more coal-fired power plants and INCREASING CO2 emissions. Japan has increased CO2 emissions since shutting down nuclear plants and has greatly increased its imports of fossil fuel.
Unless we greatly expand the use of nuclear power, it will be impossible to reduce CO2 emissions enough to keep climate change under control. That is a fact that must be faced. Any dangers of nuclear power pale in comparison with the dangers of climate change.
I agree with your point Craig. I have said that the fossil cartel has the capital and the resources all around the world to make the change, that they could already be ahead in the business of clean energy if they just invest in it, and as you say, these companies have been here for a long time and executives change, internal policies may also change and, as we should also recognize, oil and fossil fuels were THE solution 100 years ago because we didn’t see the consecuences of polution as we can now, so it might be possible for some deep changes in some of these companies, especially when we see peak oil, climate damage and it’s consecuences. I would also feel glad to hear from those companies that want to take a new road and become clean energy supporters.
Right now we see wind and solar energy’s potential, and through investing and R&D we might find other clean energy solutions, that is where we should all go, some of us by inventing, others by investing, still others by publishing, the news, etc. If we know the way, let’s show it to others that haven’t seen it yet, we will all see it in the end, let’s hope it’s not too late.
That’s nice but the problem really lies with a system in which corporations have no conscience (by nature) and will do anything to wring the maximum amount of money out of the world.
Hi Craig, 100%.Big money = big change. There is a convergence happening between public opinion and big business. It may be imperceptible at first, but it’s happening. We see 33 million people in AVAAZ gearing for a massive awareness drive ahead of 2016’s deliberations on climate change, and big industry everywhere beginning to realise they can’t continue risking the market that sustains by continuing with damaging technologies. There is much work to be done in communicating this widely to help a growing understanding of our inter- dependencies and the fragility and finite nature of the planet that sustains us. At Earth Corporation our view is that we need big players on both sides to find the answers. Sabre rattling wont cut it.
Reg Wessels
If we do not start somewhere we will get nowhere. “That’s the way it always has been” or that is just “Dow again polluting our water and natural resources” attitude will not improve our planet’s future. No matter what steps Dow takes to become more sustainable in an environmental context, it will be better for all of us. So, bring it on. Bring the brightest young people in to your organization who are learning about new technologies and materials and really make an impactful difference that is beneficial to all mankind. I think the action of creating more environmentally sustainable products will be hailed by the consumer and irresponsible if they do nothing. Encourage sudtainab entrepreneurship as the new norm.
Though I agree in principle, the problem is that the big companies are all focused on big solutions. I believe the next big change coming is small decentralized solutions where we all produce power and send what we do not need back to the grid. This decentralization will help to stabilize the grid.
The big boys are developing 1000+ MW solutions when we need affordable 25-200 KW solutions.
Right Bruce – I have developed a small (16) unit residential community using rooftop solar that collectively aggregates a small 80 kW solution that creates a net zero footprint for the home owners and feeds the excess power back to the grid for stabilization.