The environment is where we all live. However, our home has seemingly been deteriorating. Forest fires. floods and famine are becoming commonplace. Some rivers do not empty into the ocean anymore. Each summer sets a record for the hottest weather. Governments and companies set out for solutions. Governments have clear incentives for being environmentally conscious. For corporations, on the other hand, it’s less clear.
Who Left the Dishes In the Sink?
Since the dawn of mankind, the Earth has provided us with tools of success. At first, humans started with trees. We cut them down to build our houses and light our fires. When the forest had been cleared, we moved somewhere else. Then, we found minerals such as copper and iron. These materials made our lives easier, more efficient, and deadlier. Then, we found oil. By burning them, they led to automated machines and handheld Suns. Then, we found more minerals, but they generated energy paradoxically on their own. Power generation became cleaner, and weapons became more destructive. However, there is a catch. All these materials are finite. There is only so much water to grow the trees and so many mineral deposits.
Water is a key ingredient to life. Most life on this planet relies on it to survive. Unfortunately, not everybody in this world has access to fresh drinking water. Globally, about 1 in 10 people don’t have access to clean water. This issue is even more prevalent in Third World countries. Droughts have also become more widespread. Large cities like Cape Town, South Africa, almost ran out of water at one point. The Mississippi River levels are at record lows. Where is all this water going? Many will be surprised to find out that agriculture accounts for 70% of global water usage. Most of it is due to poor usage and lack of conservation. Policies and laws on water usage are lax in the US. Outdated irrigation and drainage lead to unnecessary consumption. Poor usage such as growing cattle feed in the Arizona desert leads to massive water usage in a state where water is already scarce.
Lack of water doesn’t help our primal resource either. Mining and reckless deforestation have reduced the forest coverage to a shadow of its former self. Studies have shown that the Earth lost a third of its forest by land coverage compared to 10,000 years ago. Today only 38% of the Earth’s habitable land is forested. 15% are taken by farmland and another 31% are used for grazing. 14% remain grassland, however, it’s severely lower than its peak of 44% about 5000 years ago. Surprisingly, only 1% is Urban and developed land. Mining causes permanent damage to the land. By digging holes and depressions, topsoil is removed, and mineral runoff drains into nearby bodies of water. Across the world, an estimated 23 million people are affected by dangerous levels of toxic waste. Mines also come with a myriad of extra building projects that further break the biosphere. Deforestation does not increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere but also increases relative temperatures, soil erosions, and loss of biodiversity.
Smoke and Mirrors
While governments “work” on the big solutions to the climate crisis, corporations and individuals join in on the other parts of the fight. Our power is limited, however. The majority of the water is used by industries and agriculture. About 100 companies have 71% of the global carbon footprint. Companies have taken notice and acted on its destructive abilities.
Every company, as of recently, has picked a “climate stance.” From net-zero emissions to all recycled materials, big corporations have pledged to invest in our climate future. Amazon announced a 2-billion-dollar Climate Pledge to help Amazon and other companies to be net zero carbon by 2040, 10 years earlier than the UN’s Paris Agreement. Other companies have less ambitious goals: Clorox promised to have 90% recycled packaging, Dell announced their goal of 50% emissions by 2030, and even the like of BlackRock wants to remove all of the CO2 they emitted by 2050. A lot of these claims are baseless as we don’t know what these companies are doing to reach those goals. However, more and more companies are willing to make these “commitments” as reports have shown that 77% of consumers are more willing to buy from a sustainability pledge. These masks of environmentalism may act as a boost of PR and profits since public companies need to please their shareholders.
For example, Apple announced in 2020 that they would no longer be shipping its iPhones with a charging brick and earphones, claiming it would save the waste generated by extra packaging and manufacturing costs. To further back up their claim, they argued that most buyers already have charging bricks at home. Simultaneously, they changed the charging cable from USB-A to Lightning to USB-C to Lightning. While the iPhone uses the Lightning port to charge, it uses USB to connect to the power brick. Most charging from Apple before 2020 is shipped with a USB-A port and most third-party charging bricks are also equipped with USB-A. This made many first-time buyers and anyone who wants a charging brick must buy a “new” USC-C charging brick from Apple or a third party. The package of the iPhone is smaller than the package before 2020 but combined with the additional packaging and shipping costs from charging brick, the carbon footprint is larger than the original packaging. Reports calculate that Apple saved roughly 6.5 billion dollars by not shipping these “extra” items. The company seems to have also made 29 million from these accessory sales. By not shipping earphones, AirPods demand seems to increase. The wireless earbuds alone generate more than 20 billion dollars in revenue for the company. At WWDC 2023, where Apple announced the iPhone 15 and co, they promised to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030-“through innovations in materials, clean energy, low-carbon shipping, and restoring natural ecosystems.” It seems to me that Apple is just shifting its carbon footprint onto someone else (mostly the consumer), earning some extra cash, and snagging some good PR on the side.
The Party Never Ends
The climate fight will not end in our generation. If everyone reduces their carbon footprint by a little bit, it can make a huge difference on the grand scale. However, the biggest climate opposition is the corporate world. Movements are already happening within these industries, whether these promises do come to fruition remains to be seen. To ensure that these companies reach their goals, we need to voice our opinions and lobby for better climate policies. As urban poet Kendrick Lamar once said, “We gon’ be right, we gon’ be alright” (if we don’t destroy the Earth).
Baker, Aryn. “Cape Town: What It’s like to Live through Water Crisis.” Time, Time, time.com/cape-town-south-africa-water-crisis. Accessed 27 Sept. 2023.
Eavis, Peter, and Clifford Krauss. “What’s Really behind Corporate Promises on Climate Change?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/22/business/energy-environment/corporations-climate-change.html.
Erdman, Jonathan. “Lower Mississippi Valley Drought Sees Rain.” The Weather Channel, The Weather Channel, 27 Sept. 2023, weather.com/forecast/regional/news/2023-09-24-south-drought-mississippi-river-low-levels-louisiana.
Haddaway, Neal R., et al. “Evidence of the Impacts of Metal Mining and the Effectiveness of Mining Mitigation Measures on Social–Ecological Systems in Arctic and Boreal Regions: A Systematic Map Protocol - Environmental Evidence.” BioMed Central, BioMed Central, 21 Feb. 2019, environmentalevidencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13750-019-0152-8.
Naishadham, Suman. “In Drought-Stricken Arizona, Fresh Scrutiny of Saudi Arabia-Owned Farm’s Water Use.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 28 Apr. 2023, www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/in-drought-stricken-arizona-fresh-scrutiny-of-saudi-arabia-owned-farms-water-use.
Newman, Daniel. “How Leading Global Companies Are Using Sustainability as a Market Differentiator.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 12 Sept. 2023, www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2020/07/24/how-leading-global-companies-are-using-sustainability-as-a-market-differentiator/?sh=2801de561ff3.
Reid, Kathryn. “Global Water Crisis: Facts, Faqs, and How to Help.” World Vision, 28 Mar. 2023, www.worldvision.org/clean-water-news-stories/global-water-crisis-facts#:~:text=global%20water%20crisis-,Fast%20facts%3A%20Global%20water%20crisis,haul%2040%20pounds%20of%20water.
Sarwar, Nadeem. “Removing Chargers from Iphone Boxes May Have Saved Apple Billions.” ScreenRant, 15 Mar. 2022, screenrant.com/apple-saved-billions-removing-chargers-boxes/.
Stout, Lynn. “The Do-Gooder Corporation.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Apr. 2015, www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits.
University of Lincoln. “Global Study Reveals Extensive Impact of Metal Mining Contamination on Rivers and Floodplains.” Phys.Org, Phys.org, 21 Sept. 2023, phys.org/news/2023-09-global-reveals-extensive-impact-metal.html.
Valle, Gaby Del. “Can Consumer Choices Ward off the Worst Effects of Climate Change? An Expert Explains.” Vox, 12 Oct. 2018, www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/12/17967738/climate-change-consumer-choices-green-renewable-energy.
“Water in Agriculture.” World Bank, 5 Oct. 2022, www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water-in-agriculture#:~:text=Currently%2C%20agriculture%20accounts%20(on%20average,to%20the%20evapotranspiration%20of%20crops).
Comments