首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Can Business Be Cool? Why a growing number of firms are taking global warming seriously. Companies supporting environmen
Can Business Be Cool? Why a growing number of firms are taking global warming seriously. Companies supporting environmen
admin
2010-01-10
96
问题
Can Business Be Cool?
Why a growing number of firms are taking global warming seriously.
Companies supporting environment protection
Rupert Murdoch is no green activist. But in Pebble Beach later this summer, the annual gathering of executives of Mr Murdoch’s News Corporation--which last year led to a dramatic shift in the media conglomerate’s attitude to the Internet--will be addressed by several leading environmentalists, including a vice-president turned climate-change movie star. Last month BSkyB, a British satellitetelevision company chaired by Mr. Murdoch and run by his son, James, declared itself "carbon-neutral", having taken various steps to cut or offset its discharges of carbon into the atmosphere.
The army of corporate greens is growing fast. Late last year HSBC became the first big bank to announce that it was carbon-neutral, joining other financial institutions, including Swiss Re, a reinsurer, and Goldman Sachs, an investment bank, in waging war on climate-warming gases (of which carbon dioxide is the main culprit). Last year General Electric (GE), an industrial powerhouse, launched its "Ecomagination" strategy, aiming to cut its output of greenhouse gases and to invest heavily in clean (i.e., carbon-free) technologies. In October Wal-Mart announced a series of environmental schemes, including doubling the fuel-efficiency of its fleet of vehicles within a decade. Tesco and Sainsbury, two Of Britain’s biggest retailers, are competing fiercely to be the greenest. And on June 7th some leading British bosses lobbied Tony Blair for a more ambitious policy on climate change, even if that involves harsher regulation.
The other side
The greening of business is by no means universal, however. Money from Exxon Mobil, Ford and General Motors helped pay for television advertisements aired recently in America by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, with the daft slogan "Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution; we call it life". Besides, environmentalist critics say, some firms are engaged in superficial "greenwash to boost the image of essentially climate-hurting businesses. Take BP, the most prominent corporate advocate of action on climate change, with its "Beyond Petroleum" ad campaign, high-profile investments in green energy, and even a "carbon calculator" on its websites helps consumers measure their personal "carbon footprint", or overall emissions of carbon. Yet, critics complain, BP’s recent record profits are largely thanks to sales of huge amounts of carbon-packed oil and gas.
On the other hand, some free-market thinkers see the support of firms for regulation of carbon as the latest attempt at "regulatory capture", by those who stand to profit from new rules. Max Schulz of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, notes darkly that "Enron was into pushing the idea of climate change, because it was good for its business".
Others argue that climate change has no more place in corporate boardrooms than do discussions of other partisan political issues, such as Darfur or gay marriage. That criticism, at least, is surely wrong. Most of the corporate converts say they are acting not out of some vague sense of social responsibility, or even personal angst, but because climate change creates real business risks and opportunities—from regulatory compliance to insuring clients on flood plains. And although these concerns vary hugely from one company to the next, few firms can be sure of remaining unaffected.
The climate of opinion
The most obvious risk is of rising energy costs. Indeed, the recent high price of oil and natural gas, allied to fears over the security of energy supplies from the Middle East and Russia—neither of which have anything to de with climate change—may be the main reason why many firms have recently become interested in alternative energy sources. But at the same time, a growing number of bosses—whatever their personal views about the scientific evidence of climate change—now think that the public has become convinced that global warming is for real. Hurricane Katrina was particularly important in changing opinion in America. Many businessmen have concluded that this new public mood will result, sooner or later, in government action to control carbon emissions—most likely, using some sort of carbon tax or Kyoto-like system of tradable caps on firms’ carbon emissions.
A carbon-trading system is already in place in the European Union. But even in America, some influential businesses are exerting pressure on the government to control carbon emissions. One motive is to help firms facing decisions that will depend for their long-term profitability on what carbon regime, if any, is in place. "Some asset-intensive industries are making investments now that have a 30-to-50-year horizon," says Travis Engen, who recently stepped down as boss of Alcan, a big aluminium firm. "As CEO, I wanted to make damn sure my investments were good for the future, not just today"—which, for him, meant evaluating investments assuming that his firm would soon have to pay to emit carbon.
Indeed, some expect President Bush to start thinking more about climate change after November’s mid-term elections, especially now that he has appointed a keen environmentalist as treasury secretary— Hank Paulson, who as boss of Goldman Sachs was the force behind the investment bank’s greener stance. "American businesses are starting to realise that something is going to happen on carbon," says Jim Rogers, chief executive of Duke Energy, one of the country’s biggest power producers, who reckons legislation is quite likely to pass in Congress by 2009.
Companies’ move
As firms try to do something about climate change, the typical first step is to improve their energy efficiency, by both reducing consumption and also shifting the mix of sources from hydrocarbons towards cleaner alternatives. Given high oil prices, those that have already done so have found energy efficiency to be surprisingly good for profits.
"Carbon Down, Profits Up", a report by the Climate Group, an organisation founded in 2004 by various firms and governments, listed 74 companies from 18 industries in 11 countries that are committed to cutting greenhouse-gas emissions. So far, this has brought them combined savings of $11.6 billion, claims the report. Four firms- Bayer, British Telecom, DuPont and Norske Canada—account for $4 billion of this between them.
Many companies, including BP, also see the chance to make money from providing things that help reduce global warming—from clean coal-fired power-stations, to wind farms, to mortgages with better rates for homes that are carbon-neutral. GE plans to double its revenues from 17 clean-technology businesses to $20 billion by 2010. HSBC’s decision to become carbon-neutral is part of a plan to develop a carbon-finance business, both for retail consumers and corporate clients. "We believe it is a major business opportunity for us, not a hobby or corporate social responsibility," says Francis Sullivan of HSBC. And even as car firms lobby against regulating carbon, they are investing heavily in cleaner hybrid cars.
Going carbon-neutral—in which a firm cuts its carbon output as much as possible and then offsets any left over by paying to reduce emissions elsewhere—is particularly attractive to firms that sell directly to the public and reckon that their customers want them to take climate change seriously. Since these sorts of firms are often not great carbon-emitters in the first place, "carbon neutrality" can be fairly painless.
A recent study by the Carbon Trust, a British quango, reckoned that, for industries such as airlines, up to 50% of brand value may be at risk if firms fail to take action on climate change.
City Bank also announced its determination to be carbon-neutral just after HSBC made its move.
选项
A、Y
B、N
C、NG
答案
C
解析
根据两个专有名词,将信息定位在第一个部分,这个部分谈到了HSBC,但是没有提到 City Bank
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/0Ht7777K
0
大学英语四级
相关试题推荐
StandingontherimoftheGrandCanyon,gazingacrossthisgiantwouldintheearth’ssurface,avisitormightassumethatthe
Researchintothematerialcultureofanationisofgreatimportancebecause______.Itcanbeconcludedfromthepassagethat
A、Hewouldgoclimbinginspiteofhispoorhealth.B、Hewouldnotgoclimbingbecauseofhispoorhealth.C、Hewouldgoclimbin
A、Thelongerpeoplelive,thefewerheartattackspeoplewillmeet.B、Thenumberofheartattacksisdecreasing.C、Thereisnoe
AnumberofspecialcustomsassociatedwithChristmashavebeenintroduced______.Thispassageismainlyabout______.
AnumberofspecialcustomsassociatedwithChristmashavebeenintroduced______.InmanyhomesthesymbolofthespiritofCh
Hardlyanyonepaysmuchattentiontotheair.Itis【B1】______,andweneverfeelitunlessastrongwind【B2】______along,blowi
Ourmemoriesarefantasticallycomplex,butanyonewhohaseverusedapersonalcomputerhasaready-mademodelwithwhichtoco
随机试题
假设某国对外国进口本国电子表征收复合税(这里指从价税额+从量税额),该国进口从价税率为15%,从量税率为每只手电子表10美元,现一进口商以每只100美元的价格进口10000只电子表。试计算该进口商共要缴纳多少关税?
A.意识障碍B.帕金森病C.偏瘫D.失语E.痴呆状态一氧化碳中毒致锥体外系神经障碍可出现
人体必须摄入104个以上的空肠弯曲菌才能引起肠炎,是因为
关于中华医学会所做的医疗事故技术鉴定的鉴定结论说法正确的有
张山承租林海的商铺经营饭店,因拖欠房租被诉至饭店所在地甲法院,法院判决张山偿付林海房租及利息,张山未履行判决。经律师调查发现,张山除所居住房以外,其名下另有一套房屋,林海遂向该房屋所在地乙法院申请执行。乙法院对该套房屋进行查封拍卖。执行过程中,张山前妻宁虹
2011年,李某购买了刘某一套房屋,准备入住前从他处得知该房内两年前曾发生一起凶杀案。李某诉至法院要求撤销合同。法官认为,根据我国民俗习惯,多数人对发生凶杀案的房屋比较忌讳,被告故意隐瞒相关信息,违背了诚实信用原则,已构成欺诈,遂判决撤销合同。关于此案,下
2014年11月,甲企业生产110件A产品并全部完工。生产单位A产品的计划工时是5小时,实际工时是10小时。单位产品制造费用的计划成本是15元,实际成本是20元。则下列说法中,正确的有()。
下列发文字号中,书写不正确的是()
在系统转换的过程中,旧系统和新系统并行工作一段时间,再由新系统代替旧系统的策略称为(26);在新系统全部正式运行前,一部分一部分地代替旧系统的策略称为(27)。
Heistallerthan______inhisclass.
最新回复
(
0
)