Big corporations stance on GW - Do this give the deniers second thoughs?

The stance of big corporations should give deniers pause for second thoughts. I suspect though many in dismissing the work of climate scientists with their own crackpot theories will just as easily find reasons to dismiss the stance of big corporations. It is interesting that in the upper echelons of science, politics and business the overwhelming majority opinion is that man's activities are causing global warming. Businesses don't grow big without being able to recognise and analyse correctly the factors which will affect their business.

The answer to your question is that it should, but it won't. The very essence of denial is that nothing gives you second thoughts.

Basically people are arguing that it's good PR or that these companies are making money off of green technologies.

Sorry, but did everyone forget the record-breaking profits of ExxonMobile in recent years? The big money right now is in oil, not alternative fuels. BP could be focusing entirely on fossil fuels the way Exxon does and be making huge profits in the short-term, but they know global warming is a real issue, and are smartly preparing accordingly. The same is true of the other companies mentioned by Ingela.

Despite Mikira's condescention with regards to capitalism, I think she's the one who doesn't understand it. Companies don't make profits with good PR. They make profits by being prepared for the future changes in their product demand. If global warming were a big scam, these companies would all be making huge mistakes in preparing for its consequences. If global warming were not a problem, they'd all be acting the same as ExxonMobile.

If you can separate the fact that each of these corporations make millions, if not billions from sales of green technology, no this is what one would expect.

The markets are demanding greener technology, and corporations are providing what the market demands. This is Capitalism working.

What most have problems with is being forced to accept politicized science. It is possible to be for a cleaner environment while not believing the dogma of AGW

[Edit] No I don't agree. Siemens, ABB, GE all help their profits by providing their customers with motors, drives, and automation that allow the customer to produce better goods using less energy. The competition between corporations is what develops the technology that makes this possible.

BP is still going to distribute energy no matter what it will be in the future, and they will do this while making more profit than they do today.

Volvo needs to make greener cars or go out of business.

While I'm sure some would rather sit back and not change, this isn't how a Capitalist economy works. With Capitalism, there is always competition to provide the customer what they want, and now they demand greener products.

I would rather see the EU concentrate on getting all member states to use lead free gas, as lead is a known toxin. It shocked me to see that leaded gas was still being used in parts of Europe today.

I find this one very apt:

"Companies composed of highly skilled and trained people can't live in denial of mounting evidence gathered by hundreds of the most reputable scientists in the world"

John Browne, then CEO of BP, New York Times, 8 Dec 2002

I for one never work for subsidiaries of Exxon-Mobil (the opposite end of the spectrum, paying ex tobacco industry lobbyists to spread misinformation) when I can help it. And I am definitely not the only one in my profession with that attitude. Gotta love capitalism!

global warming is forcing companies to spend more money on research and development - the ICE is a very highly engineered component - spending more money improving a design that is nearly perfect is not helpful to automotive companies. In the case of volvo - in the US they don't have a very fuel efficient line-up. You might expect a toyota or honda to make a statement like that - not really volvo.

Ingela - No matter what you want to believe, Dr Jello is 100% correct. I can see where you might not understand how capitalism works, since you live in Sweden, which if I remember correctly is socialist. But even in socialist countries the CEOs and Presidents of big businesses practice capitalism to run their companies, since they are working with a global economy.

As such they need to follow the trends and different energy sources and technologies are the trend. Also their are people like Dr Jello and me, who believe in a clean environment, but not in Anthropogenic Global Warming.

So we need these changes, since the resources we are using aren't infinite. I have pointed out other industries based in the USA that are doing similar things, but not for the same reasons you have. I did it to prove that companies are doing things already without the government making policies to make them change.

Go ahead and believe what you want to believe, but stop trying to force people to have similar beliefs, since a lot of us see things way differently than you do.

I have to admit that I admire the cause of people like you that desire to make a difference (no matter the absurdities of the cause), but, don't you think you are contributing to the hypocricy of your cause by the use and/or abuse of modern day conveniences - such as the computer? You should be out on FOOT using natural human energy instead of carbon emitting devices such as the energy waste emitted by electronic devices. Obviously you own a computer. Do you own other energy consuming devices as well? Is your home totally green? What about your transportation means? Do you use a microwave, a cell phone, a TV? Do you actually think people are going to take you (and your kind) for real if you sit around wasting energy by staying on your computer? Or your use of all other energy consuming, waste emitting devices?

If you turn your own lifestyle back by about 100 years, maybe people will listen to you. Until then you are only blowing smoke which contributes to the very issue you are trying so hard to counter.

The biggest proponents of global warming seem to be the ones that leave the largest carbon footprints. Maybe you should address this issue. Yes, this is an issue. It is more of an issue with us "deniers" than the hype issue that is ignorantly created by the pro side camp of the supposed global warming issue.

Are you sure you are doing all you can to limit climate change in the world as well as in your own living room? Yahoo Answers is a pissey place to push your cause. Have you gone bigger? Are you adressing the big corps personally? I sure hope so, because if not, how can we take you seriously? Do you know that it is less cost effective and more energy consuming to "go green" than it is to remain the way we are?

Again, I admire your cause. But I don't think I can join in your (or your camp's) enthusiasm of global warming when you and your own kind are contributing (in alarming numbers) to the the very claim of your own cause. Please don't take me wrong - just take me seriously. Change yourself before you try to change me, because I (we) see right through you and your type. All you want is for us to change our lifestyle so you don't have to change your fluff stuff lifestyle. When you give up all of your toys and prove the difference it has made in the climate issue, then I will give up mine.

It is just public relations. They have far less to lose from making idiotic statements than fighting the Global Warming Doomsday Cultists.

Even the 'Man-did-it' Global Warming enthusiasts have sent a confusing message as regards their TRUE commitment to the 'cause'. Somewhere between 10 and 15 THOUSAND of the 'Man-did-it' desciples boarded pollution-spewing jet planes, headed to resort locations in Bali to discuss how WE (not they) should be more responsible in our use of energy. These geniuses....the experts who claim they care so much about us.... have never heard of Video-conferencing??? I believe that they showed their TRUE colors in Bali!!

i can feel another conspiracy theory brewing. come on lets face it, if hundreds of studies wont convince them i don't think anything will. just as there are still people that think the link between smoking and lung cancer is over hyped and that the ozone hole was natural these people will probably believe what they want regardless of any evidence telling them otherwise. so what can a few CEO's do?