We Debunk the Latest Corporate Climate Lie | NYT Opinion

Finally, corporations are jumping into action on climate change — or at least that’s what they’d like us to believe. Many of the world’s biggest and most polluting companies have recently promised to curb their carbon output, by reaching net-zero emissions in the next few decades. These sweeping pledges conjure a world where we can have it all: economic growth and global trade — without the global warming that usually comes with that. While saving the planet demands an approach more ambitious than incremental change, these corporate fantasies of the future just don’t stand up to scrutiny. In a new @nytopinon video, we expose three major flaws in net-zero pledges that make them a dangerous distraction from the crisis at hand.

----------
Whether it's reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, New York Times video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. It's all the news that's fit to watch.

[LemonArsonist]

It's also important to note that a lot of the "nature" solutions these companies talk about are where they pay a third party company to plant a certain number of trees, but the oversight on these third party companies is non existant. Planting trees as a way of removing CO2 only works if you can protect those trees for hundreds of years, but the third party companies don't have to do that, and will usually plant fast growing (and fast dying) non-native trees that ruin ecosystems in order to reach their corporate quotas.

[berenicemarchese]

Corporations shouldn't be given a choice. We need clear, firm regulations strictly enforced, with real punishments for breaking promises (not just fines).

[lukehendriks]

Are we really surprised corporations are lying. Still?

[TheTonialadd]

What’s sad is that we’ve been “talking” about this since the 70’s.
Major corporations don’t care about the little people.

[jfitz]

Wealthy Elite: “We want to be responsible with the climate.”
Reality: “That means you’re going to have to make some changes & probably even have to tighten the belt financially.”
Wealthy Elite: “Well forget that then.”
Politicians: “Maybe we really should do something.”
Wealthy Elite: “You want your campaign funding?”
Politicians: “Never mind, you do you man.”

[eevandersonn]

Even further, these pledges are dangerous because:
- The small slice of legit methods of achieving net zero (eg actually planting trees) often have adverse impacts on communities, ecosystems, and economies if not done with care
- As with all greenwashing, these promises are marketing solutions that absolve consumers from worry and can lead to MORE emissions when people believe their behavior has no environmental consequence and therefore consume more.

[MiSt]

It's not up to them to decide what time they're going to stop, it's up to the government enforcing these changes now, and the businesses need to comply, or we will all pay the price while they scurry away with their profits

[AggresivelyBenign]

I worked at the corporate office of a huge international business, and they were one of the first businesses to try a net zero policy on a smaller scale - it was a joke of a publicity stunt. The “recycling” in the building was just a trash can with a recycling logo on it, the light timers would regularly go off while we were working overtime or using the restroom, and none of the real problems were addressed — like the company’s affect on ecosystems around the world, and their products being un-reusable or recyclable.

[anandsharma]

I had a friend who used to say about the world: "Everything is a business of fooling others."
I haven't heard a wiser sentence in my life.

[nevarran]

Oh yeah, only real regulations could address the problem. Expecting the corporations to solve it is like waiting on your local drug dealer to cure your addiction to drugs.

[nicholasshackleferd]

Oh my goodness we need more government regulation to fix the problems caused by government regulation.

[loopsajnatilopomsoc]

thank you NYT for taking responsibility and inform about the climate collapse, the reason its speeding up and how to fix it. MORE OF THIS PLEASE

[Rnankn]

Why on earth would corporations get ‘credit’ or compensation for the carbon removal of forests? Trees plant themselves, and were deforested already. It is a double standard, because they did not account for the removal of carbon sinks, the emissions already released, or the cost of a larger economy. It is saying there is economic value in nature, but it was free to extract and destroy to the point of catastrophe, but now restoring or foregoing further destruction will be counted as a credit which justifies further extraction and destruction. Nature is not capital, it is a living system. It cannot be treated like a bank with deposits and withdrawals. Plus, market growth rates and emission rates are logarithmic, they will double every few years. And atmospheric carbon is persistent, it compounds. But natural systems are organic systems that seek equilibrium, within the limits of physical constraints. They are resilient until the moment they collapse. Economic growth is not possible to reach zero emissions because net emissions will not be zero if they grow. Do economists not understand climate science, or are they purposefully misrepresenting reality?

[pablouribe]

Corporations have learned that they can say anything, without actually doing much or nothing at all, and still keep their "good" image to consumers. We got to wake up.

[sprayartist]

This all puts things into perspective, we need companies to expedite the processes they promised

[conradkostelecky]

When has the NYT ever been honest? NEVER!

[sevnightingale]

Nature based solutions are the key, and that doesn't just mean planting trees.

Regenerative agriculture, syntropic Agroforestry, biochar, and wetland restoration are some examples nature based solutions that can sequester billions of tons of CO2 annually.

I work in the carbon removal space & the money these corporations are contributing are actually making a huge difference. It's allowing promising climate change reversing projects to scale.

[vladstrimbu]

I would put this video an the opening of every business climate meeting. So we have a real baseline of truth being discussed.

[dntfrthreapr]

Owning corporate stock means owning a stake in the machinery that is rapidly destroying the planet. Everyone is complicit. People like to blame corporations for everything, but they like the things and lifestyle that capitalism offers.

[willm]

The only thing you can count on from corporations is that they will do everything in their power to grow their profit every year - that’s it.