Difference between revisions of "Green Capitalism"
Roy Jakobs (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | {{Article | |
| − | + | |Subtitle=Research question: Which factors affect the emotional value of clothing in the WEIRD societies and how did this change over time. | |
| − | + | |Image=http://www.merlinpress.co.uk/acatalog/GREEN-CAPITALISM--WHY-IT-CAN-T-WORK-.html | |
| − | + | |Summary=__ | |
| − | In the early days(till around 2002) the industrial answer on climate change has been a sabotaging action from the: Global Climate Coalition [https://www.desmogblog.com/global-climate-coalition GCC] that provoked and opposed policies to reduce the C)2 emission | + | |Article= In the early days(till around 2002) the industrial answer on climate change has been a sabotaging action from the: Global Climate Coalition [https://www.desmogblog.com/global-climate-coalition GCC] that provoked and opposed policies to reduce the C)2 emission |
This was a lobby group that paid off scientists to provide fake evidence or reports stating that the climate change wasn’t real or way over exaggerated. | This was a lobby group that paid off scientists to provide fake evidence or reports stating that the climate change wasn’t real or way over exaggerated. | ||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
Carboncloud Posted on 19th August 2020; Can a product be carbon neutral? | Carboncloud Posted on 19th August 2020; Can a product be carbon neutral? | ||
https://www.carboncloud.com/2020/08/19/can-a-product-be-climate-neutral/?gclid=CjwKCAjwlbr8BRA0EiwAnt4MTrrcJndq2bGYYq5PevUyc6zT9bwl3GjFKXUkjYLei6BuvEnmvIRmFxoC3msQAvD_BwE | https://www.carboncloud.com/2020/08/19/can-a-product-be-climate-neutral/?gclid=CjwKCAjwlbr8BRA0EiwAnt4MTrrcJndq2bGYYq5PevUyc6zT9bwl3GjFKXUkjYLei6BuvEnmvIRmFxoC3msQAvD_BwE | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{YearSelector | ||
| + | |Year=2020 | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{License selector | ||
| + | |License=CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike4.0 | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{Frictionary selector | ||
| + | |Frictionary term=New Earth | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{Curriculum selector | ||
| + | |Curriculum=Theory Program | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{Category selector | ||
| + | |Category=Student Work | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{GraduationYear selector}} | ||
| + | {{Articles more}} | ||
Explanation off Carbon offset > And how its failing. | Explanation off Carbon offset > And how its failing. | ||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdW-6MXB0sI | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdW-6MXB0sI | ||
Latest revision as of 14:41, 15 December 2020
Contents
The wikipage input value is empty (e.g. SomeProperty::, [[]]) and therefore it cannot be used as a name or as part of a query condition.
In the early days(till around 2002) the industrial answer on climate change has been a sabotaging action from the: Global Climate Coalition GCC that provoked and opposed policies to reduce the C)2 emission
This was a lobby group that paid off scientists to provide fake evidence or reports stating that the climate change wasn’t real or way over exaggerated.
After the switch of about 5 years ago more and more companies went into so-called ‘Eco capitalism’. Many would go for a strategy of green washing (Green washing is that a company is paying a lot of money to marketing, that will make them look that they are doing a good job for the environment) but they aren’t really transforming anything big in their production process.
Another strategy that became popular is offering goods that are ‘hip’ and ‘trending’ in the eco world; examples are tiny houses. The concept of building your own tiny house and living a minimalistic ‘rich’ life is picked up by big companies who claim to be eco friendly but use all these bad materials in their construction of prefab tiny houses.
At this moment it is a proven concept that if a company gets an incentive, most will search for better ways to improve the production process in a healthy way for the environment but only if it’s an economical gain for themselves. Most of the political and economical powers still refer to the market forces that will solve the problem within the production chains of the ‘free market’. That means if supply and demand asked for more ecological demands, the supply will provide and the 'economy will fix the global environmental issues'
'The Supply and Demand That’s Driving Climate Change' Article
To have an example how supply and demand helped develope a city for the good, we see the example also made in the previous article. About the City of Amsterdam (and alot of other Dutch city's); People were sick and tired literately of all the emissions the cars gave in the city centers, by demanding more healty living space and demanding more cycling lanes, the supply came for them and banning cars out of the city.
Example 2: How C02 is still a economical market:
CO2 emission rights became a capitalist good, that is for sale and tradeable on the market that company’s can exceed their own regulated emission per year. It means that the government provides companies with a max they can emit within one year of production, written down as stock rights.
(I found this 'webshop' where you can actually 'offset' your carbon foodprint: https://www.goldstandard.org/take-action/offset-your-emissions Due to this site, it almost feels like we are back on the track of church indulgences you could buy in the middle ages after committed a sin and still wanted to go to heaven)
This problem with the emission rights for example is that if a country has a too strict climate regulation for big contributors of the CO2 emission, those company’s will simply move their production to a country where the rules are almost non existent and the company's won’t have to contribute to the regulations within there country itself. (see example of fashion production changing the river colour’s)
Predictionism: Due to this new collaboration of H&M and Vampire's Wife the rivers will turn black, just in time for Halloween. (link to [https://about.hm.com/news/general-news-2020/the-vampire-s-wife-in-collaboration-with-h-m---a-glamourous--dar.html)
H&M and other fast fashion company really think there are doing better, with more use of recycled materials, and the 'return your old clothes' policy so you get a discount on your next purchase, and H&M can recycle your old clothes. It will make the company brand itself 'green' and the costumer will believe that they doing actual good. Instead the most returned items end up in big containers and shipped to landfills or get burned. Only the items that are returned in the shop itself, will be on inspection hanged up back again for sale.
For this the Green capitalism only became a new way for companies to make more money while the consumer thinks they are actually changing the system for the better of the climate. Its time the responsibility of the climate change and pollution of our ecosystem is brought on the table of the big company's instead of the small consumer who tries to do good but won't make a dent in the overall system
But instead; it’s still a messed up marketing trick.
additional sources:
What is greenwashing? example with Fiji bottled water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOpa8kd6fBI
Altho it is a TEDtalk, and is aimed at the comsumer again taking the role of reducing their carbon footprint. Instead of forcing the big company's to take steps and use the audience of TED te make them aware with that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63hAHbkzJG4
Carboncloud Posted on 19th August 2020; Can a product be carbon neutral?
Links
CONTRIBUTE
Feel free to contribute to Beyond Social.
Explanation off Carbon offset > And how its failing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdW-6MXB0sI