US businesses, not government, poised to lead efforts to halt climate change

[Hydra009]

From his claim that global warming was a gigantic hoax masterminded by China to his promise to pull the United States out of the landmark Paris agreement, Donald Trump’s surprise election win was widely decried by those who feared that recent progress in tackling climate change was about to come undone.

But a growing number of environmentally friendly American businesses â€" including major airlines and banks, as well as energy, tech and pharmaceutical companies â€" are pushing back against the president-elect’s attempts to dismiss climate change concerns and are planning to take the lead in the drive to make the US a worldwide leader at slowing or reversing the damage.

Jeffrey Perlman, founder and chief executive of New York-based Bright Power, an energy and water management company for mostly multi-family residential buildings, said he had “never been so happy for energy policies at a state level”.

He said: “We have an incoming administration not willing to even admit that climate change is a thing [but] they won’t be able to dismantle a lot of the great energy policies in the states that are being more progressive.

“If we’re talking about how people interact and consume energy, from how they heat and cool their homes to how they do business in a more environmentally friendly way, the only way that happens is through business.”

“Business is more important than ever if we’re going to face a bunch of climate deniers,” he said. “The way climate change has become a partisan issue in the US has become a big issue in the world, other countries look at the US Senate, where one can’t get a simple, non-binding resolution passed that says humans are changing the planet, those countries say, ‘These yahoos in the US aren’t going to do anything, so why should we?’”

Eidlin believes that businesses need to send a loud enough message that the Trump administration cannot ignore them. “Many companies have expressed support for US staying in the Paris agreement, more are working with municipalities across the US, so there is a lot of activity,” he said.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/01/climate-change-donald-trump-us-companies

[Baruch]

Oy, propaganda.  It is from a British rag too.  We have business that are "clean" .. usually services.  We can't all live on a service economy.  We are solving our industrial pollution by moving it all to China and India, and letting them choke on the fumes.

[Cavebear]

Oy, propaganda.  It is from a British rag too.  We have business that are "clean" .. usually services.  We can't all live on a service economy.  We are solving our industrial pollution by moving it all to China and India, and letting them choke on the fumes.

I will agree with you on this...

[Hydra009]

Agree with what, exactly?

The Guardian is generally pretty decent.  And it's not like we can't find this sort of story elsewhere.  Besides, I prefer something I can source and verify over Baruch's (often wrong) gut feeling any day of the week.

Yes, it's true that the US is a service economy.  But it's been that way for decades now.  Obviously, a more environmentally-conscious service economy is better than the alternative. And even something as small as a bank making a slight environmental improvement is still a win in my book, minor though it may be.

And yes, China is lifting a heavy industrial burden, but for anyone who hasn't yet noticed - China has been making a serious effort to clean up its act, while we have an incoming administration on record as calling it a hoax and is unlikely to take the threat seriously, preferring to leave this mess to either the private sector or future generations.

Any good news on this front is welcome, which is why I posted it.  Given the disaster waiting for us, it's important to remind ourselves that not all is lost.

[SGOS]

Business has recently been ahead of the government on a couple of occasions, probably because it's good for business. But we need all the help we can get.  I'll take it.  North Carolina might not notice how far behind they are on some issues, with its politicians being too busy trying to figure out who gets to use what bathrooms and whatnot, so climate change is naturally on a back burner there.  But it is encouraging.

[Hydra009]

Yeah, NC is definitely NOT at the forefront of tackling climate change, which is odd considering that the Outer Banks are a big tourist draw and them going under water would put a bit of a crimp in business.  And the election - sweeping Republicans to power in almost every race but the Governorship - certainly hasn't helped.

But despite the ineffectual leadership, NC is 2nd in solar power and iirc 10th in nuclear power, though the majority of its energy still comes from coal and natural gas.  Also, it's slightly lower than average in CO2 emissions per capita.  Not terrible for a red state.  But these next 4 years are going to be rough.  Don't expect NC to pass any landmark climate legislation anytime soon.

[Baruch]

The total carbon produced each year, no matter where it is produced, is the issue.  This won't stop without stopping the industrial world, and we won't do that, without killing billions of people as all the rats try to leave the ship (to Mars or wherever).  Actually, we will get lot of weather and shore based problems, even maybe a return to dinosaur climate, with seas 300 ft higher than now.  Life will survive, I don't hold out much hope for the ape related species.

[Hydra009]

The total carbon produced each year, no matter where it is produced, is the issue.

No kidding.  Hence the Kyoto Protocol, Paris Accords, etc.

This won't stop without stopping the industrial world, and we won't do that

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/false-dilemma.html

It is possible to both manufacture and reduce emissions significantly.