START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

5 Things We Shouldn’t Invest in If We Want to Save Our Planet

5 Things We Shouldn’t Invest in If We Want to Save Our Planet

Private enterprise, especially in the form of large corporations, is frequently at odds with sustainable thinking. There are exceptions, of course, but the pseudo-ethical position of being “responsible to the shareholders” favors positive growth every fiscal quarter whatever the long-term cost. (Kind of like our elected representatives tend to favor what will be easiest to sell their constituents on before the next re-election over the interests of the next generation.) It’s the tragedy of the commons, where every individual acts selfishly and all of us are worse off.

Yet as these long-term disaster scenarios we’ve been warned about are coming to pass, there’s a ray of hope. Green investment is becoming less of a niche and more of a thing. Either individuals who are smart enough to think beyond next week are moving into positions of influence and effecting a sea of change, or some of the old guard have become convinced we’re no longer talking about a future generation’s problem. We are that generation. We’re reaping what’s been sown. As I’ve recently seen coined, climate change has become climate’s changed. And it can keep getting worse, so any long-term planning, political or economical, must take the planet we live on into account.

To that end, here are five terrible long-term investments for our planet and our species.

1) Coal: The European investment bank, EU’s main lender, has recently announced that they will (mostly) no longer be financing coal-powered electricity, a move that echoes a previous policy decision by the World Bank. Pound for pound, coal is one of the worst greenhouse gas emitters, but what’s worse is how frankly unnecessary it really is. There are so many ways to get electricity, coal only seems cheap when you ignore the overwhelming cost of the environmental damage it causes.

2) Oil: Well, duh. Astoundingly, even the government continues to invest in this stuff. Besides the usual non-sensical subsidies being provided to perhaps the world’s worst environmental pirates, Canada and the U.S. have been pushing forward on Keystone XL despite widespread opposition. The return on this investment is Armageddon. Let’s put our money into building something that won’t destroy everything else.

3) Meat: I’m not a vegetarian. Let’s get that out of the way. I respect that choice from an ethical and animal rights standpoint, but my push on reducing per capita meat consumption in North America is environmentally-motivated. There are public health reasons that meat should be less artificially cheap than it is, as well. But in keeping with the focus of this article, let’s shelve those two (excellent) other reasons for not eating (as much) meat and focus on the environmental reasons.

It’s an inefficient way to raise food calories thanks to energy loss between trophic levels, it’s supported by artificially cheap, overproduced corn that relies on enormous amounts of fossil-fuel based fertilizers, and it’s incredibly non-local, resulting in more emissions due to transport of both feed and meat. Large-scale, factory-farmed meat is a bad investment.

4) Soft drink companies: Again, there are non-environmental reasons why profitable junk-food peddlers are a bad investment. In the end, the more successful these companies are at peddling their calorie-laden nectars, the more we all pay for it through our beleaguered public health infrastructure. But it’s also part of our throwaway culture. Staying one step ahead of trends towards greater health consciousness, soda-makers invented a need from whole cloth: pure, clean bottled water. The problem is all those horrible plastic bottles are anything but clean. How much would it cost to clean up those immortal bits of plastic filling our oceans and climbing up the food chain?

5) Traditional car companies: We’re moving into a phase where nearly everybody has to develop hybrids lest they be left behind. But if you’re going to invest in a car company, don’t invest in the ones that are providing minimal improvements in fuel economy as a publicity stunt. Pushing ridiculous, over-powered trucks because it’s manly and American and then trying to jump onto the “eco” bandwagon is ridiculous in the extreme. 99 per cent of men don’t need a giant truck and even less women need a giant SUV, but this has become “the thing” in North America’s middle class. I would only go out of my way to support a car company that is mass-producing and promoting at least one vehicle without a gas tank.

In summary: This list is neither exhaustive nor does it purport to be a top five in any quantitative sense. As a person with a (very) modest amount of money in investments myself, I can tell you that it’s possible to make a fair return without investing in dirty energy or other world-destroying companies. The energy portion of my portfolio was a Canadian hydro/wind/solar collective for many years and I was happy to see it grow for reasons that went deeper than a small increase in my RRSPs.

There are many ways to invest. By lobbying government to support or not support certain industries or companies, via personal investment decisions, and as a consumer. The smart money is on the investments that still leave us with a planet that can support us in 30 years. Let’s all be smart.

Related stories:

Top Industry Experts: “Green Energy is a Smart Investment”

The Future of Eating

Read more: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo from Thinkstock

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

113 comments

+ add your own
4:35AM PDT on Jun 27, 2014

Keep up the best work guys, nice posts are here to get more benefits.insurance hanover

5:36AM PDT on May 1, 2014

I’m impressed with the surpassing and instructive blogs that you just provide in such very short timing.home insurance

2:25AM PST on Feb 27, 2014

Inconceivable points. Sound arguments. Keep going the truly amazing work.maryland health insurance companies

11:23PM PST on Dec 17, 2013

Your blogs and its stuff magnetize me to return again n again.
http://www.gold401krolloverplan.com

7:28AM PDT on Aug 28, 2013

thanks. I agree !

6:25AM PDT on Aug 17, 2013

thanks for sharing :)

1:38PM PDT on Aug 8, 2013

Very interesting, thank you!

11:35AM PDT on Aug 4, 2013

(Continued from Below)

For the cost of the Cheney/Bush war of choice in Iraq, we could have installed solar panels on every single roof in the United States of America, which would have substantially reduced the pollutants, contaminants and even the necessity of coal and oil fired energy plants. Instead the neocons pushed forward with the war plans that they had assembled before they were even in office and long before the horrific events of 9/11/2001. They said when they were planning the invasion of Iraq that "needed a Pearl-Harbor-like event" to get their plan started. This might explain why the worst terrorist act in our history occurred on their watch despite the fact that they were warned 52 TIMES that the attack was imminent.

11:34AM PDT on Aug 4, 2013

Janet W. "Until science comes up with some cheap, workable solutions, we must continue on the way things are, I suppose."

Science is always doing its part. It is the corporation that is obstructing the path to carbon free energy. For years the corporate interests told us: "Solar is not profitable. It costs more to install than it will ever pay back."

The CEO of Duke Energy even wrote an Op-Ed in which he said in so many words: "Right now solar is not productive. It doesn't pay for itself, however, I have come up with a plan that will make it productive. Duke Energy will install the solar panels on your roof and you will pay your energy bill to us just like before."

Translated, this corporate quote means: "Don't decentralize my cash cow!" The CEO was earning TEN MILLION DOLLARS at the time of his inane statement. The worst fear of the corporatocracy is that we stop tithing the billionaires to demonstrate our fealty to their royal majesties.

The Cheney/Bush administration invaded an unarmed country that sat on the second largest oilfield on our Planet. Iraq had no part in 9/11 contrary to what Cheney/Bush/Rice/Addington/Rove told us. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, regardless of the warnings provided by the Bush Crime Family. Saddam Hussein hated Osama Bin Laden, and perceived him as a threat. For the cost of the Cheney/Bush war of choice in Iraq, we could have installed solar panels on every single roof in the United States of America, which would have

10:51AM PDT on Aug 4, 2013

Thank you for the excellent post. (p, t)

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.