Over 70% of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Comes from 100 Companies

While we should all do our part to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, a recent study reported in the Guardian finds that such efforts will frankly be worthless so long as a handful of powerful private entities account for the vast majority of climate change-causing pollution.

The Carbon Majors Report (pdf) “pinpoints how a relatively small set of fossil fuel producers may hold the key to systemic change on carbon emissions,” says Pedro Faria, technical director at environmental non-profit CDP, which published the report in collaboration with the Climate Accountability Institute.

Traditionally, large scale greenhouse gas emissions data is collected at a national level but this report focuses on fossil fuel producers. Compiled from a database of publicly available emissions figures, it is intended as the first in a series of publications to highlight the role companies and their investors could play in tackling climate change.

The report found that more than half of global industrial emissions since 1988 – the year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established – can be traced to just 25 corporate and state-owned entities. The scale of historical emissions associated with these fossil fuel producers is large enough to have contributed significantly to climate change, according to the report.

ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron are identified as among the highest emitting investor-owned companies since 1988. If fossil fuels continue to be extracted at the same rate over the next 28 years as they were between 1988 and 2017, says the report, global average temperatures would be on course to rise by 4C by the end of the century. This is likely to have catastrophic consequences including substantial species extinction and global food scarcity risks.

This puts addressing climate change square in the hands of executives, investors, and shareholders–the narrow class of individuals less likely to be impacted by climate change, best equipped to adapt to it, and most likely to be wrapped up in short-term gains ahead of long-term consequences.

Investors should move out of fossil fuels, says Michael Brune, executive director of US environmental organisation the Sierra Club. “Not only is it morally risky, it’s economically risky. The world is moving away from fossil fuels towards clean energy and is doing so at an accelerated pace. Those left holding investments in fossil fuel companies will find their investments becoming more and more risky over time.”

There is a “growing wave of companies that are acting in the opposite manner to the companies in this report,” says Brune. Nearly 100 companies including Apple, Facebook, Google and Ikea have committed to 100% renewable power under the RE100 initiativeVolvo recently announced that all its cars would be electric or hybrid from 2019.

And oil and gas companies are also embarking on green investments. Shell set up a renewables arm in 2015 with a $1.7bn investment attached and a spokesperson for Chevron says it’s “committed to managing its [greenhouse gas] emissions” and is investing in two of the world’s largest carbon dioxide injection projects to capture and store carbon. A BP spokesperson says its “determined to be part of the solution” for climate change and is “investing in renewables and low-carbon innovation.” And ExxonMobil, which has faced heavy criticism for its environmental record, has been exploring carbon capture and storage.

But for many the sums involved and pace of change are nowhere near enough. A research paper published last year by Paul Stevens, an academic at think tank Chatham House, said international oil companies were no longer fit for purpose and warned these multinationals that they faced a “nasty, brutish and short” end within the next 10 years if they did not completely change their business models.

It is also worth pointing out that while a large number of the corporate culprits are based in the West, overall they span most of the world: rich and poor, developed and developing, democratic and autocratic:

screenshot-www.theguardian.com-2018.10.23-10-19-00

Most of these companies are not household names, which reflects the low-key nature of the global energy industry: many of us in the developed world take for granted the seemingly endless supply of electricity, gasoline, and other energy supplies. The extraction, production, refinement, and delivery of these fossil fuels occurs unseen, involving a complex network of companies dispersed around the globe.

Thus, as with so many other solutions to climate change, there will need to be a comprehensive, globally coordinated effort by the international community to reign in on pollution and environmental degradation, in cooperation with–or even in opposition to–some of the most powerful corporate interests in the world.

Is there any possibility that the global masses can apply pressure their governments (and to a lesser degree their businesses) to take action? Are these individuals and institutions too wealthy and far removed from the public to be influenced and accountable to either governments or their constituents? What are your thoughts?

The Three Richest Americans Hold More Wealth Than Bottom 50 Percent

Using data from Forbes’ annual ranking of the 400 richest Americans, the Institute for Policy Studies, a left-leaning D.C. think tank, published a report last fall finding incredible wealth disparities in the United States. As Forbes reported:

Most dramatically, it found that the country’s three richest individuals—Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos—collectively hold more wealth than the bottom 50% of the domestic population, “a total of 160 million people or 63 million American households.” Roughly a fifth of Americans “have zero or negative net worth,” the authors wrote.

Bezos, Gates and Buffett held a combined fortune of $248.5 billion in mid-September, when numbers were locked in for the 2017 Forbes 400list. Since then that figure has risen to an estimated $263 billion, thanks largely to Bezos, whose worth has jumped more than $13 billion as the result of a surge in Amazon’s share price.

“If left unchecked, wealth will continue to accumulate into fewer and fewer hands, a trend we’ve been witnessing for decades,” wrote Josh Hoxie, one of the study’s co-authors.

Continue reading

Photos: Chinese-American Rivalry in Asia

As China grows more powerful, it is challenging America’s decades-long dominance of Southeast Asia. As New York Times reported, most countries are either leaning towards China or playing both sides to their advantage.

U.S. v. China

Even staunch U.S. allies are increasingly orienting towards China, namely in terms of commercial ties: every Asian country now trades more with China than the U.S., often by a factor of two to one, an imbalance that will only widen as China’s economic growth outpaces that of America’s.

screenshot-www.nytimes.com-2018.10.16-16-11-27

Nevertheless, many of the 20 countries caught between the two powers do not want to choose sides, instead opting to pursue “strategies intended to draw maximum benefit from both powers, minimize risks of angering either and preserve their independence”.  This is far from the clean lines drawn between the Americans and Soviets in Cold War-era Europe.

 

The Cities and Countries with the Most Super Rich

According to a report from Bloomberg, Hong Kong surpassed New York City with the highest population of people worth at least $30 million:

The former British colony saw its number of ultra-wealthy increase 31 percent last year, to about 10,000, research firm Wealth-X found, higher than the nearly 9,000-strong population of the U.S.’s largest city. Tokyo came third, while Paris beat out London to take the European crown as Brexit weighed down the U.K. capital.

The number of ultra-rich worldwide rose 13 percent last year, according to Wealth-X, totaling about 256,000 people with combined assets of $31.5 trillion. Asia saw the fastest growth, driven by mainland China and Hong Kong, the study’s authors wrote. Reflecting the region’s rise, its share of the global population of people with at least $30 million rose to just over one-fourth, up from around 18 percent a decade ago.

[…]

Women accounted for about 35,000 of the ultra-rich last year, a record-high share of nearly 14 percent, the study found.

While Hong Kong topped the city rankings, nowhere in mainland China made the top 10, despite the country being third in the list of nations. That’s because China’s wealthy are widely dispersed, illustrated by the fact it was home to 26 of the 30 fastest-growing cities for the ultra-rich.

screenshot-www.bloomberg.com-2018.09.20-16-16-47

Although the world’s wealthiest tend to concentrate in major cities — since they are centers of global trade, politics, and commerce, as well as leisure and recreation — they are dispersed enough to change the results when one looks at a national level: for example, countries like Canada and Germany are home to some of the world’s largest communities of millionaires, even though none of their cities are in the top ten:

screenshot-www.bloomberg.com-2018.09.20-16-15-56

 

Similarly, no city in mainland China made the top ten, despite the country being third in the list of nations. That is because China’s wealthy are widely dispersed throughout the numerous economic and metropolitan hubs across the country — in fact, all but four of the 30 fastest-growing cities for the ultra-rich are Chinese.

Moreover, Bloomberg notes that the sheer scale of wealth is being pushed ever upward: though billionaires are of course still rare, they are less so than they used to be; the same goes for millionaires of all levels.

screenshot-www.bloomberg.com-2018.09.20-16-16-25

One should ask how it is that the global economy can produce such unfathomable concentrations of wealth into a sliver of individuals and communities, when literally half the world remains mired in poverty (and most of the remaining half teetering). Around the same time that Hong Kong climbed to the top spot as home to the ultra-wealthy denizens, its poverty rate has increased to one out of five residents.

As Rich as Croesus

The Iron Age Kingdom of Lydia, located in what is today western Turkey, is hardly a household name, especially compared to its neighboring Greek and Persian contemporaries. Yet as far as we know, the Lydians were the first and only people to invent money as we know it: a standard, universally-accepted medium of exchange whose value is backed by a recognized authority.

Invented sometime in the seventh or sixth centuries B.C.E., Lydian coins were of high quality and stamped with the sigil or image of their ruler, allowing even the illiterate to recognize them as legitimate legal tender. They facilitated commerce between strangers by allowing them to make transactions without needing to barter goods or weigh some commodity like gold. Coins also made it far easier to travel long distances to buy things, rather than lug around cattle, gold, wheat, or some other valuable commodity. Continue reading

The Marvels of Globalization

Globalization is something. The laptop where I am typing this is Chinese (Lenovo), and the antivirus software I use to protect it is Russian (Kaspersky). The world wide web I am using was invented by a Briton (Tim Berners-Lee) and first tested in Swiss-based lab operated by a consortium of 22 mostly-European countries (CERN). My browser of choice, Chrome, was developed by a firm co-founded by a Russian Jew (Google). The messaging system I use most was invented by Swedes, Danes, and Estonians (Skype). The gas station I use most is a British-Dutch conglomerate (Royal Dutch Shell). Continue reading

Americans Won’t Take Back the Jobs that Immigrants “Stole”

All these Americans talking about foreigners taking their jobs, and they still won’t walk the walk about filling those jobs, according to Bloomberg:

American farmers have been complaining of labor shortages for several years now. Given a multi-year decline in illegal immigration, and a similarly sustained pickup in the U.S. job market, the complaints are unlikely to stop without an overhaul of immigration rules for farm workers.

Efforts to create a more straightforward agricultural-workers visa that would enable foreign workers to stay longer in the U.S. and change jobs within the industry have so far failed in Congress. If this doesn’t change, American businesses, communities and consumers will be the losers.

Perhaps half of U.S. farm laborers are undocumented immigrants. As fewer such workers enter the U.S., the characteristics of the agricultural workforce are changing. Today’s farm laborers, while still predominantly born in Mexico, are more likely to be settled, rather than migrating, and more likely to be married than single. They are also aging. At the start of this century, about one-third of crop workers were over the age of 35. Now, more than half are. And crop picking is hard on older bodies.

One oft-debated cure for this labor shortage remains as implausible as it has been all along: Native U.S. workers won’t be returning to the farm.

Continue reading

Fifty Cents to Avoid a Lifetime of Debilitation

Some weeks ago, I read a piece in The Economist that has stayed with me. It was about the efforts of Sierra Leone, among the world’s poorest countries, to combat “neglected tropical diseases” (NTD), a family of 17 diverse communicable diseases that afflict over 1.5 billion in tropical and subtropical areas worldwide.

It featured one victim named Hannah Taylor, who woke up one day with a fever, followed by her legs swelling up to four times their normal size. The physical damage was irreversible, and the subsequent appearance and putrid smell led to her being ostracized by her community. She was a victim of lymphatic filariasis (a.k.a. elephantiasis), a mosquito-borne infection that could have been treated safely with a pill costing no more than fifty cents before it progressed.

But instead, the microscopic worms infested her body, debilitating her. For years she thought she had been a victim of evil witchcraft and was deeply depressed.

Eventually, Taylor put on a brave face and campaigned to raise awareness about the disease, its causes, and why victims shouldn’t be stigmatized. She passed away some weeks prior to the publishing of the article; she was quoted as expressing  happiness that her children would not suffer the way she would, thanks to Sierra Leone’s remarkable progress in fighting the disease.

Progress or not, it is incredible to think that billions of lives are negatively impacted by something as mundane to most of us as a mosquito bite. It is even more incredible that a mere fifty cents – spare change we’d throw in a tip jar without a thought – is all that stands between someone and a debilitating disease. It is utterly senseless that in a world with so much wealth and resources sloshing around that we have not been able to address this vast disparity in health outcomes and quality of life.

 

Where Most Sporting Goods Are Made

The Pakistani city of Sialkot may not be a household name, but it is the source of the Adidas footballs that are being used in the World Cup (as they had been in the last one).

In fact, Pakistan’s twelfth-largest city — with less than 700,000 residents — is the world’s largest producer of footballs, manufacturing of 40-60 million footballs annually, about 60% of global production. Sialkot is also the world’s biggest maker of surgical tools. Even Germany’s iconic lenderhosen are best crafted by the leather-workers of the city. Unlike many other manufacturing hubs, most of this work is done by family-owned small and medium sized enterprises, often clustering together to pool their resources. Continue reading