"Bezos did address employee questions about the climate." This implies that he answered our questions, which he did not. As @heyjohnryan reports, Bezos "sidestepped" our 1st question, and "did not respond" to our second.
https://www.kuow.org/stories/employees-confront-bezos-over-amazon-s-carbon-problem …https://twitter.com/toddbishop/status/1131617789301542912 …
In the Paris Agreement, countries agreed to limit the increase in global heating to 1.5 °C. Amazon itself committed to the Paris Agreement. What that means is that we we all need to radically cut our emissions, Amazon included. Why don't we lead?https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2017/06/05/trump-paris-climate-amazon-microsoft-starbucks.html …
-
-
What makes you think we aren't? The reticence to make glib commitments makes me think that tangible changes are in the works, but they can't be talked about yet. If there weren't plans for a bold new path forward, I suspect they would be far looser with their words.
-
I see this differently. Amazon's no-date commitment for 100% renewable energy is, by definition, glib. Yet it allows us to look like we're taking bold leadership when, so far, we're not.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.