Before
going further, please read Bill McKibben's article in Rolling Stone from last
month: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719
Good.
Now,
let's talk
In
summary: to keep climate change to a (debatably 'safe') 2°C rise, we must
leave $20 trillion worth of fossil fuel in the ground.
This
makes a complete mockery of emissions reductions, energy efficiency and
responsible behaviour. We must leave that carbon in the ground, end of story
(burning it slower will not help). This means a wholesale shift to renewables
and, more importantly, a boycott of fossil fuel energy companies - products,
services, profits.
Most
companies and institutions have some form of public stance on climate change.
For many 'sustainability' is a core value. Some even claim to be carbon
neutral. However all organistions rely on some degree on the fossil fuel energy
system - either directly by providing services to a lucrative sector or simply
through the purchase of their products.
And
nearly all climate change strategies, for public and private institutions are
based on emissions reductions and offsets, which do not address the basic fact
of writing off those $20tn of assets in current circulation.
It's
relatively easy to be 'for' something like emissions reduction. The real test
then, is not a stance on emissions, but a stance leaving fuel in the ground.
So,
the question to ask of CEOs, chair(wo)men, presidents and prime ministers is no
longer whether or not they have an opinion or policy on climate change or
emissions reduction.
The
question to ask is what role they will play in keeping those $20tn worth of
carbon in the ground.
No comments:
Post a Comment