Drowning in Greenwash


November, 2015. A newly elected Canadian prime minister took to the floor of the Paris Climate Summit and proclaimed "Canada's back."  The climate pariah, Stephen Harper, had been vanquished. Canada would again change direction.  Yeah, right.

The Paris summit was notable for the remarkable agreement that global heating must be limited to not more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. We were all on the same page.

In attendance was the then head of Germany's Potsdam Institute, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. A reporter asked him if the 1.5 C target was achievable. He said yes but it would require the "induced implosion" of the fossil energy giants. Governments would have to put down the oil and gas and coal giants and rapidly transition to clean energy alternatives. Some cast it as the Marshall Plan for the 21st century. Of course, nothing of the sort has happened.

A new analysis suggests that the fossil fuel industries' claim to be transititioning to clean energy is greenwashing, a polite term for horse shit.

“Until there is very concrete progress, we have every reason to be very sceptical about claims to be moving in a green direction,” said Prof Gregory Trencher, at Kyoto University in Japan, who worked with Mei Li and Jusen Asuka at Tohoku University.

“If they were moving away from fossil fuels we would expect to see, for example, declines in exploration activity, fossil fuel production, and sales and profit from fossil fuels,” he said. “But if anything, we find evidence of the reverse happening.”

“Recent pledges look very nice and they’re getting a lot of people excited, but we have to put these in the context of company history of actions,” Trencher said. “It’s like a very naughty schoolboy telling the teacher ‘I promise to do all my homework next week’, but the student has never worked hard.”

Schellnhuber was right. Governments have to shut down the fossil fuel giants but they won't. That goes for our own Mr. Trudeau with his preposterously overbudget pipeline.

Comments

  1. Northern PoVFebruary 21, 2022 at 10:50 AM

    Are the Notleys, the Horgans and the Trudeaus more dangerous than Harpers, the Clarks and the Kenneys?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Disaffected LibFebruary 21, 2022 at 3:23 PM

    More dangerous? I don't know. How do you judge that? Do we measure them by their deeds or their broken promises? Is it fair to have higher expectations of Trudeau than we ever had of Harper?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Up in Smoke. 300 Sq. Mi. of Amazon Rainforest Lost Every Day.

Image
  The Amazon rainforest is disappearing at what should be an alarming rate. 312 sq. mi. or 808 sq. kms. every day. Over the past 30 years humans have destroyed a patch of the Amazon equal in area to the states of Texas and New Mexico . The Amazon – historically a great carbon absorber, since trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen – now releases more carbon than it stores, which adds to, rather helps to reduce, our global climate crisis. Deforestation rates decreased slightly from 2004 to 2012. But since then, they’re back on the rise, especially in the past couple of years, since Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil. In 2018, as Bolsonaro campaigned as a patriotic man of the people, scientists predicted that once the Amazon lost more than 25% of its tree cover, it would become a drier ecosystem, all because deforestation changes weather patterns (due to how trees respire), which in turn reduces rainfall. Furthermore, as the forest becomes fragmented, areas surrounded...
Read more

The Cognoscenti Syndrome

  There is a group of people I think of as the Cognoscenti, people who are well educated, very informed and of rapidly diminishing relevance. Their ranks include writers such as Chris Hedges and Glen Greenwald. These are people who have honed an almost Puritanical value system, readily finding fault in any direction. They are scathing in their attacks on Republicans and Democrats alike to the point where they become nihilists. They don't endorse. They prescribe. This is where they fail. They're unable to advocate for anything that might resonate with the public whose interests they argue are being trammeled. Donald Trump was bad but Joe Biden is scarcely better. This is where their elitism comes in.  74 million may have voted for Trump but, hey, they didn't know any better. The mob that stormed the Capitol. They were just victims of the system venting their frustrations. All the racism, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, white nationalism - inevitable side effects of their oppr...
Read more

Who Asks "Why?"

Every time there's a conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, all we hear is 'why?'  Why, as in, whose fault is this? It's easier to affix blame if you can truncate the event. Pick a convenient start date, something recent. In this case we'll make it either the Israeli eviction of Arabs from Jerusalem or the scuffle that took place outside the mosque in response. If those don't work, let's go for Hamas launching unguided rockets into Israel. That's even better because it tags Hamas with the blame. The nice thing about this approach is you can just keep using it. It goes on and on, just as it has for the past half-century since the '67 war. You can even date this whole mess to the beginning of the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israelis are said to have called these periodic wars, "mowing the lawn." The idea is that, every now and then, you have to take these Arabs to the woodshed. And then you keep your powder dry unt...
Read more