http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/09/major-corporations-contradict-gop-profiting-carbon-reductions.phpSummary:
This article is from treehugger.com, a popular environmental blog. The article is about how companies are beginning to invest in carbon reduction. For long, environments-saving organizations have been portrayed as "job-killers." The media often shows how environmental protection loses a lot of money. However, high-end companies are beginning to invest in carbon reduction without the incentive of government bonuses. They are beginning to realize that this actually increases efficiency and profit. Still, though, there are people who fight against carbon reduction in factories.
Opinion/Reflection:
I've always thought that factories should reduce carbon emissions. I realized that doing so would cost the organizations a lot of money, but it still seemed like the right thing to do. But now that companies have found that it actually increases profit, it seems like the only logical thing to do! It doesn't make sense that some corporations and politicians are still fighting against it.
Questions:
1: Why would a company not invest in carbon reduction?
2: Are there any unseen downsides?
3: Why are some politicians and lobbyists so adamant on making environmentalists look like bad people?
Politicians and lobbysists aren't necessarily trying to make environmentalists look bad, but they are try to keep their voters on their side. This causes them to go in a mode where they try to not upset anybody, and try to keep things exactly the way they are. Carbon reduction will be in need of carbon tax which will have an impact on consumers and economic growth. "Carbon tax is likely to have bigger impact on poor communities that already struggle to heat their homes or use their vehicles for work. Also, it can skew the development of different sectorss for the economy as a whole" (http://climatelab.org/carbon_tax). Carbon reduction is better for the environment and could help us in the longrun, but in the moment it is easy to see why some politicians and lobbyists are against it.
ReplyDeleteI think its crazy that environmentalists would be labeled as "job-killers". They might have a problem with some peoples jobs but that is simply because of the fact that they are damaging the earth we live on. If environmentalist are considered "job-killers" by workers whose jobs are damaging the earth then those workers should be considered "earth-killers". I know it is difficult today to find a job, but there has to be ways of doing your just and also not harming the earth. We just have to figure them out.
ReplyDelete1)If the environmentalists have been considered to be "job-killers" for such a long time, how come they've done really nothing to fix this problem?
ReplyDelete2)How come the media only shows the low end of environmental protection losing money, as to on the high end with gaining money. Isn't that better?
3) I feel as though there is always going to be a fight with Carbon reduction. I mean everyone is entitled to their own opinion, correct? Like Dan stated,it increases profit and it seems to be the logical thing to do, but there is going to always be someone against it. Whether or not we like it, not everyone to be on one side. It will never end up being a unanimous vote.
I think that they have not invested in carbon reduction because it takes time to come up with something to do about it. It would also cost money to change what they have now and make it carbonless. If they took the time and money they would have to stop working on the days that it is under construction, which would mean they wouldn't make money those days.
ReplyDelete