Some of the wealthiest people on the planet are making the move towards green. This fact is demonstrable by the new trend of billionaire investors putting massive amounts of their money into electric cars, solar and wind power and geothermal energy initiatives.
Dr Philip Beresford has compiled the British Sunday Times Rich List since 1989, which this year includes the Green List. The Green list is a compilation of the 100 richest tycoons worldwide who have made either serious investments in green technology and businesses or hefty financial commitments to environmental causes.
The Green List shows that world’s super rich are embracing green like never before.
The list is dominated by American tycoons, with the likes of Warren Buffett and Bill Gates leading the pack of green entrepreneurs. Buffett is heavily involved in electric cars and solar power, while Gates has backed alternative fuel enterprises such as oil and algae.
George Clooney and his Tango
The strong American representation stems from the large contribution of the entrepreneurial hotbed of Silicon Valley, where young innovators such as Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin putting their financial muscle behind green projects. Also helping the cause is the Obama administration’s commitment to a huge stimulus package involving the very technologies that investors are focusing on.
Apart from the Americans, the list is made up of Chinese investors (mainly solar and electric-car technology), German tycoons (wind turbines and the like) and a sprinkling of British based business minds such as Sir Richard Branson who is piling millions into alternative fuel technologies.
Many of these eco-entrepreneurs are not only backing new green technology, but also putting their support behind environmental activism, promoting awareness of green energy, climate change and the profit-making possibilities of green business. This can, in turn have a great impact on the political green agenda, where the Obama administration can lead a push from world leaders towards green initiatives.
The Green List is evidence that the move towards green is not only a moral issue, but an economic necessity. These tycoons have previously led innovation ahead of their time, and their new focus on green is a strong indication of the direction that business is going. The powerful individuals on the List are worth a total of nearly £267 billion and are at the forefront of a global shift towards, sustainable, green business practices. The current economic downturn only serves the strengthen to focus on renewable energies and green technologies. The move towards green is no longer an attempt to save the environment, but the equally fragile economy too.
theGrEEnWORM! said,
June 22, 2009 @ 10:04 pm
It is unfortunate that this is what it has come down to. These celebrities want little to do with their odd looking cars, but they feel a sense of moral satisfaction for putting their face and selling this car to others. But who is regulating the emissions of all this activity that humours the irony of the situation.
Do we know whether these cars with lower emissions are actually more sustainable to produce? Results are showing that “eco friendly cars” are doing more harm than good and this knowledge is not publicised, rather the cars are aggressively marketed at us! The people who genuinely want to make a difference.
I am happy with the progress the world is taking towards being green happy, I fear however that if we allow the corporations to advocate that their products will lead us in the directions we need move towards a greener world; we are then allowing the minds of businessmen (who think that it can better be done with making some profit and using a celeb) to lead us on the road to developing a sustainable environment.
Some thoughts I sourced [origin unknown] during my uncomfortable reading of the green situation:
“Only when the last tree has died; the last river, poisoned; and the last fish, caught – will we realise that we cannot eat money”
“We never know the worth of water; until the well is dry”
Lastly a comment which I propose as a greenfan motto:
“The Earth is not a gift from our parents. – It is a loan from our children”
theGrEEnWORM! said,
June 23, 2009 @ 7:17 am
My point is captured in Guardian article — where Lexus were completely exposed for their marketing parade about going green, by giving Paul McCartney his own free Lexus Hybrid: “but Paul McCartney faces criticism after his hybrid car was delivered by cargo plane.
The Lexus LS 600h was sent to the former Beatle from Japan as a gift from the carmakers. But campaigners said that any environmental benefits from using the car would be undermined by its mode of delivery… the impact of flying the car to Britain was the equivalent of driving it around the world six times.”
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/15/carbonemissions.japan)
Celebrities think they are being moral hero’s by helping to market a green car — thinking that if they can get everyone else to buy one by smiling in the car… well then its a job well done! regardless of the fuel guzzling super cars they own in their garage!
Toyota are continuously pushing their Toyota Prius (a hybrid) as the green car of the future, but this car has been reported as doing more harm to the environment than good!
Many scientists are saying that Toyota’s best-selling hybrid, the Prius, is actually bad for the environment. Some are even asserting that it has a worse impact on our world than the widely-hated Hummer.
With such universal concern (whether genuine or a desire to be “hip”) to live a “greener” lifestyle, it’s no surprise that this argument has become quite heated, though surprisingly quiet.
After all, if Toyota says that it’s created a car that gets excellent gas mileage and is therefore better for the environment than other cars are, the consumer wants to believe this. So what are these new, conflicting reports?
As it turns out, burning gas is not the only (or even the major) factor in a car’s impact on the environment.
The Prius’ battery contains nickel, which is mined in Ontario Canada. The plant that smelts this nickel is apparently nicknamed “the Superstack” because of the amount of pollution it puts out; the area for miles around it is a wasteland because of acid rain and air pollution.
But the main problem that the “Dust to Dust” study has with the Prius’ impact on the environment comes next.
That smelted nickel then has to travel (via container ship) to Europe to be refined, then to China to be made into “nickel foam,” then to Japan for assembly, and finally to the United States. All this shipment for each tiny step in the production process costs a great deal, both in dollars and in pollution.
The study then concludes that — all the production costs in mind — the Prius costs about $3.25 per mile and is expected to last about 100,000 miles. The Hummer, on the other hand, with all the same factors counted, costs about $1.95 per mile and is expected to last about 300,000 miles.
So keep it green – greenfans! Lets not be by superficial green strategies that are really about making quick, unethical and undisclosed profits — using our moral conscience as their sales strategy.
IF A PRODUCT CANNOT BE MADE 100% SUSTAINABLY — IT HAS NO PLACE IN THIS WORLD!