Our case was a debate on whether this firm should invest in ABB-India as they expanded the electric service in India. On the plus side, they would be improving lives by providing basic electric service in an improverished are of India. On the negative, the electricity would be generated almost 100% with coal, increasing global carbon dioxide emissions. Growth of the business (and therefore growth of the stock's value) was expected to be strong. Can you guess what Al Gore's sustainability company decided to do? Wouldn't you think, given their position on global warming, that they would run away from such an investment? No! They put the company on their list, and according to Mr. Blood, the only reason they have not yet invested in the company is because the "returns have not yet been high enough." What do you think of that?
They hope to use their investment position to put pressure on companies to improve their business practices to become more sustainable, "by proxy if necessary." Hmmm...
Creating change within the system.
ReplyDeleteNot quite as much chaos as anarchy, plus it leaves a significantly smaller "carbon footprint" than molotov cocktails.
Paz (Pasley)
It should but then doesn't surprise me that Al Gore and company would be willing to invest as you mentioned. I really feel Mr. Gore's primary motivation is the betterment of Al Gore, being a champion of the environment was just a vehicle to get to the end point. Peronally, I have no respect for him. If you read much about what he has actually accomplished in his life it reeks of priviledge and political connections with no real moral or ethical compass.
ReplyDelete