Really, this should be a weekly column, but I’m afraid to write about the idiots who often give me headaches.
The problem is that hardly a day goes by that we don’t see someone (who should know better) make a fool of themselves over climate hysteria. It’s getting harder and harder to know that you’re working out. It’s not that hard a workout why Decrypting, so they are in these positions how they got there.
A few weeks ago I wrote about the new bully in the Big End of Town. I was writing about the big banks and superfunds that embraced the pursuit of policies to limit global warming to 1.5°C from pre-industrial levels.They believe this is their corporate goal 2015 Paris Agreement.
The issue I wanted to highlight was that this 1.5°C limit was abandoned many years ago by credible climate scientists, including the IPCC.
Australian banks and superfunds have announced in their policies, annual reports and press releases that they will adopt business strategies that minimize global warming and direct investments and funds only in the direction of companies and institutions they prefer. I am clarifying. 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
The analogy I draw is that this is akin to funding and supporting sailors leaving the sea only. Palos de la Frontera By sailing west, in hopes of next landing in the East Indies. On the other hand, there are experienced and capable sailors on the wharf, who are left without a place to go because they have no backing. These sailors know that a fully funded fleet about to depart, led by fools, is doomed to failure… stranded unsupported sailors say what Columbus says and sailed with Columbus!
Let’s be very clear. Anyone who buys into the idea that he can limit global warming to 1.5°C from pre-industrial levels has no common sense. they are ill-informed. They don’t understand science. they are ideological. They are climate extremists. In fact, they are true climate deniers. As soon as you identify someone, a company, an institution or a politician who is talking about limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, you have identified another climate denier. They are climate fools…
Climate fools are the new pandemic and it’s time to watch them more closely.
There was a dispute over a seat on the board of directors of AGL, Australia’s oldest and largest energy company. It was also the subject of a hostile takeover attempt by an equity owned by Mike Cannon-Brookes.
of Australian Financial Review I am writing:
Software billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes should be applauded for his compelling proxy campaign to appoint four hand-picked directors to the board of his prey, AGL Energy.
It looks like three of his four candidates will be elected at AGL’s annual meeting on November 15th. And the only thing that prevents him from electing all four of his is one unfired candidate, John Polarers (remember, Cannon Brooks initially elected Polarers as chairman of his AGL). suggested). !).
of Guardian later wrote:
Billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes successfully shook the board of Australia’s largest electricity company at AGL Energy’s annual meeting, with all four of his proposed directors gaining shareholder support .
upon RN breakfast, host Patricia Carvelas interviewed Bryn O’Brien, Executive Director of the Australasia Center for Corporate Responsibility. If people need guidance on how to best navigate in the corporate world, I think they know this outfit.
But it’s not.
This is what the Australian Center for Corporate Responsibility says about its work.
‘ACCR’s Climate Program aims to accelerate Australia’s transition to a low-carbon economy in line with the Paris Agreement. We will engage ASX-listed companies on their climate risk disclosure and need to set emissions reduction targets in line with the Paris Agreement, and encourage ASX-listed companies to review their industry associations’ support for climate policy. I’m looking for
‘Few of Australia’s largest listed companies have a credible commitment to align their activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement, backed by detailed planning.
‘We target companies whose industry groups are lobbying against climate change, especially when that lobbying is against their own policies.
‘A rapid decarbonization of the global economy is essential to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. We call on his ASX-listed companies to set and disclose credible short-, medium- and long-term emission reduction targets in line with the Paris Agreement.
With this statement, it is clear that ACCR, like banks and superfunds, clearly lags behind the facts. Paris Agreement or with the expressed opinions of the climate science community, including the IPCC. ACCR maintains the view that the 1.5°C limit is achievable, credible and responsible, even if it is not. In other words, ACCR is a true climate denier.
A fool should know this. You don’t have to be in the climate science community, IPCC, academia, or government to know that the 1.5°C limit was abandoned years ago. The scientific community and the IPCC recognize that this goal will always likely be unattainable simply because the costs and disruptions to global energy infrastructure and economies are “a bridge too far”. Did.
In an interview with ABC’s O’Brien, Carvelas quoted AGL Chairman Patricia Mackenzie.
“To align AGL with 1.5°C warming, we would close all of our coal plants by at least mid-2029 and all coal plants in the national electricity market two years from now. is needed.”
Mackenzie said this is not possible because the exchange capacity cannot be met in time. In effect, Mackenzie is simply stating what a credible climate scientist and what the IPCC recognized years ago.
Calvelas asked O’Brien her reaction to it, to which O’Brien replied, “Look, this is a scare campaign.”
That’s when Karvelas put pressure on O’Brien, saying the AGL chairman claimed he had no alternative technology. And everyone should know this, or at least know that renewable energy cannot provide stable power. Especially when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining. And the much touted environmentally friendly hydrogen alternatives have yet to prove themselves as affordable and viable alternatives. No, but that is the challenge of AGL…” agreed.
That is why the Executive Director of the Australian Center for Corporate Responsibility not only argues that companies like AGL must accept unattainable targets, but also whether or not they can provide energy after 2029. Mr. O’Brien admits that it should remain unknown whether or not. Coal-fired energy is not available, but AGL believes it must be shut down now.
Is O’Brien doing this in the name of “corporate responsibility”?
Where is the corporate responsibility to stakeholders? Mr. O’Brien, who represents ACCR, said that AGL will end its current business operations and that within the next six years, it will seek to develop an unproven technology that will warrant AGL’s business operations. I’m proposing to expect to appear. In other words, slash your wrist now and trust that you’ll find a solution before it bleeds.
What do you tell your shareholders? What do you tell your employees? What does AGL say to the communities it serves? Will this benefit Australia?
This is not the company’s responsibility. This is business madness.
was she there Palos de la Frontera She told the fleet, “Sail west and don’t stop until you reach the East Indies. You don’t need a chart. It’s just a challenge. Don’t listen to Columbus. He’s running a terror campaign.” I’m just here!”
If this is a corporate responsibility, who needs it?
Do you have anything to add? Join the discussion and comment below.
