CSR: GE

Recently I read an article entitled as "CSR Doesn't Pay" written by David Vogel, a professor from University of California's Haas School of Business. In this article he wrote about CSR and how executive should behave because of it. That is to say, there are equal companies who are successful, and who are not successful, despite having slow/high CSR, so executives should strive to be more CSR but should not expect to become more successful than their competitors and should not expect there less responsible competitors to be punished. One reason which is attributed to this trend is simply the customers who care about CSR are greatly outweighed by the ones who don't.

I believe this is true. The way I see it, the biggest change will only occur when a significant portion of GE's customer push Congress for better CSR rewards and harsher punishments for companies which do not meet the minimum standard.

The reason I chose this article is because he gave a few examples of companies with high CSR and low. On such company was GE which is praised for having environmentally safe products and better energy efficient products as well.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/10/16/csr-doesnt-pay-lead-corprespons08-cx_dv_1016vogel.html

GE's values and actions are as follows:
Passionate
Curious
Resourceful
Accountable
Teamwork
Committed
Open
Energizing

Imagine

Build

Solve

Lead

I think who ever created these values and actions are intelligent. They chose commendable words that makes GE appear like an incredible company. I see the last four words as the most important because they seem to inspire the most innovation. Enstien once said that innovation and imagination is more important than knowledge. Thus I attribute these values to America since we are the leading innovators of the world. So more or less, when GE emphasizes on these values I feel a strong connection to the company, not only because the values and actions are very real, but because they also represent how I want America to be represented.

The EPA Finally Accepts Biomass!!

An editorial article caught my eye the other day in the Boston Globe. The article was about biomass and how the EPA (The Environmental Protection Agency) concluded that it was the best way to "curb Greenhouse gases." This is the first time that the EPA has regarded biomass as the leading source to deal with forest management without creating greenhouse gases. While this decision won't make a huge difference to the climate in the short term, over time this will benefit the earth. While some say biomass isn't the perfect alternative energy, with the EPA approving it, biomass has taken a step in the right direction.

Finally the EPA has let biomass become a larger contributor in the energy world. The EPA has realized that biomass can contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases. I give the EPA praise because they made the right decision by approving the new biomass policy.


http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2011/01/26/a_win_for_environment_and_for_energy/

Obama's Goal for Clean Energy

In his State of the Union address, President Obama spoke of the importance of utilizing alternative clean energy sources. Reports Ryan Tracy of The Wall Street Journal, Obama has set the goal that by 2035, 80% of America's energy will be from clean sources. Part of the difficulty surrounding this goal is the extreme amount of funds needed to do energy research and make the shift from the country's current energy system to a new one. As such, Obama will have to appeal to members of Congress and impress upon them the significance of using clean energy. If he succeeds, a large portion of the federal government's budget will be dedicated to his goal.

Apart from helping the environment, one of the benefits of further developing America's use of clean energy is the subsequent strengthening of the energy market that will occur. By creating a competitive business market for energy, Obama believes America will "win the future by being the best place on Earth to do business." This statement demonstrates how vital business and the economy are to the wellbeing and power of the United States.

Source:

Tracy, Ryan. "Obama Renews Clean Energy Push." The Wall Street Journal 29 Jan. 2011. The Wall Street Journal Digital Network. Web. 30 Jan. 2011.

Exxon Mobil’s ethical statement:

Exxon Mobil’s, ethical statement:

“We believe that an unwavering commitment to high ethical standards and business integrity is critical to our competitive advantage and shareholder value. We expect our employees to integrate our commitment to ethical behavior into their activities and decision-making, including complying with all applicable laws and recording all transactions accurately in our books and records. Employees are required to annually confirm they have read the policies set forth in our Standards of Business Conduct. We provide detailed training on our ethics policy to all employees every four years. Regular training is provided on international trade laws applicable to our business, including the anti-trust and competition laws of the United States and other countries where we do business.” – (http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/)

Reading their ethical statement, Exxon symbolizes commitment and high ethical standards towards both their activities and their decision-making. By imposing their employees to read the “Standards of Business Conduct”, it provides the sense that Exxon Mobil is very serious about their ethical behavior, and following the laws in all their transactions. Exxon Mobil also states that they are a company that is trying to find “better”, “safer” and “cleaner ways” for them to deliver the energy needed in the world. By using these words, Exxon Mobil is represented as an “environmentally friendly” company that is trying to find new habits and customs to offer energy.

Investment in Clean Energy Grew Substantially in 2010

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance the world invested more than ever before in clean energy. From China to Germany to the United States of America; the world is ever increasing its effort to transition into clean energy. In 2009, the total investment in clean energy was 186.5 billion dollars. This figure (2009) is more than triple the amount of 2004 (51.7 billion). Well if you think that's impressive, in 2010, the world investment increased to $243 billion! Along with the article, the author provides his audience with an image which displays the 'VC-PE Clean Energy Investment by Sector for 2010.' The image exhibits that solar and wind power were the most heavily invested in.

I don't see how anyone could possibly fine anything wrong with this article or the results which Bloomberg New Energy Finance posted. I'm ecstatic that not only America is taking the transition into clean energy seriously. Many European countries and China are pushing for clean energy was well. What seems to be an incredibly well year for China only seems to get better because Bloomberg reports that China spent the most out of any other country on clean energy - roughly 51.1 billion dollars. Aside from a few corporations and programs losing funds, I find that 2010 was a good year for clean energy. I hope that we keep exponentially increasing the amount of money we spend on energy every year. In terms of ethics, I imagine some people see it as our moral responsibility to Earth to invest in clean energy. In a way, it's our way of returning an invaluable favor which Earth is doing for us. That is to say our existence is nearly impossible to be without Earth, thus it's our obligation to repay the favor, so to speak.

Thank you for reading and please leave a comment.

---

Elvis Amaya

http://blogs.forbes.com/williampentland/2011/01/22/clean-energy-investment-reached-record-high-in-2010/

Why are we still investing in coal?

I was reading an article today in the New York Times about how the Midwest United States is still heavily investing in coal. Coal is a major energy source that contributes to major greenhouse gases and pollution. All over the coasts of America, coal production has diminished, yet in the Midwest, the coal industry is booming. According to the article St. Louis just purchased a $4 billion dollar coal plant. Why are we spending billions of dollars on an industry that is declining and hurts the environment? 

I believe these types of purchases are unnecessary. Although these huge plants create jobs and economic growth, solar plants and wind turbine plants also create jobs and spur economic growth over time. All the while these renewable energy sources do not harm the earth! And it's not like in the Midwest the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. These coal companies and investors need to realize the ethical business choice is to leave coal behind. It hurts the environment! We need to move on from these pollutant energy sources.

If you are interested, here is the article I was referencing...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/business/energy-environment/17COAL.html?ref=coal

Key ethical issues the energy industry faces

Key ethical issues the energy industry faces

What is ethics? Ethics is a set of moral principles especially ones relating to a specified group, field or form of conduct. When you apply ethics with the energy industry, things can get very messy. The oil industry is very complicated in general- there isn’t an “environmentally friendly oil company”. However that doesn’t mean that the oil companies can play around with ethics to maximize profits, there are sets of rules they need to follow.

Exxon Mobil is the biggest company in the world. “Being so huge, it has been estimated that Exxon-Mobil is responsible for 5% of world co2 emissions, and yet they are the only oil company that doesn’t recognize climate change.” (http://makewealthhistory.org/2008/03/10/which-is-the-most-ethical-oil-company/ ). The company is facing questions about its clearness on climate change issues coming from a new report that says the company is still funding “climate change denial” groups, a practice that was reported to have stopped.

Exxon Mobil benefits from economic conditions that hurt most American’s struggling to fill up their tanks. 15 environmental and consumer rights organizations are asking Exxon to provide more resources to renewable energy. Exxon responded that it reinvest profits into clean energy, and “reduce global greenhouse gas emissions”. However, Russ Roberts, Exxon spokesman said, “the company believes that pursuing wind and solar power production, as Expose Exxon has put forward, is "not economic to do." (http://www.ethicsworld.org/corporategovernance/corporatereputation.php)

The Expansion of Canadian Oil and the Ethics Behind it

Enbridge Inc. is Canada's major oil distributor and the largest single supplier of oil to the United States. It was recently released that Enbridge would begin supplying oil to China as well. The company's decision to do so creates competition among countries vying for Canadian oil. This competition should result in an increase in profits for Enbridge because the company will be able to name its own prices.

The concept of business ethics relates to this development because of the ways in which the crude oil will be transported to China. Using either the Northern Gateway pipeline or oil tankers presents a risk of spillage. The likelihood of such an event is higher because of the distance between Canada and China. As a result, environmental groups are opposed to the expansion of Enbridge Inc. The ethical question then becomes whether Enbridge should be more concerned about making money or protecting the environment.