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 …
-
-
Replying to @emahlee
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @unruly_tuples
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emahlee @unruly_tuples
Color me skeptical, but how can we say we're a leader on climate, and then partner with fossil fuel companies to accelerate and expand oil extraction?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emahlee @unruly_tuples
How can we be thinking about climate as a strategic driver of our risks and opportunities if the highest ranking Sustainability person in the company wasn't aware of our oil and gas business until we told her about it in March?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emahlee @unruly_tuples
Amazon could be carbon neutral today. It has the resources to buy the offsets. It has the resources to sign the Power Purchase Agreements. It doesn't. How do I know this? Microsoft does it. MSFT DCs are at 60% & it buys RECs for the rest. Why not Amazon? It's not good business
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Hi Paul... can you please explain what it means to “buy the offsets”?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So, when you pollute in some way, you release emissions. If you can quantity those emissions, you can "offset" by paying another scheme to "not release" the equivalent. A simple idea is "we released this much carbon, so we'll plant trees to offset" - this isn't a very good idea.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @PaulDJohnston @eightlimbed and
Offsetting is basically "we're not going to make the emissions worse". But it does nothing to lower emissions. If the company emits more, it offsets more. It still emits. So offsets are really only a stopgap. Moving to 100% renewables for electricity is a great goal.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @PaulDJohnston @eightlimbed and
But without a timescale it's a pointless aspiration. It's like me saying I'm going to be a billionaire.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Exactly.
8:19 AM - 24 May 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
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.