Editor’s note: This commentary is by Elizabeth Courtney, co-author of “Greening Vermont: The Search for a Sustainable State,” and former executive director of the Vermont Natural Resources Council. She was a member and chair of the Vermont Environmental Board and a 1995 Loeb Fellow at Harvard University.
We may have a surprising new ally to help us fight climate change.
Its name will be familiar to you because for generations Coca-Cola has been synonymous with American culture. In the 1930s and 1940s the bottling company started a series of local businesses in towns across the country to deliver cola to local customers and refill their empties.
The company grew, like so many others, after World War II. Coca-Cola’s aggressive resource acquisition practices afforded it boasting rights to what has become a 1.8-billion drinks per day operation. As it grew, news of the company’s investments in apartheid South Africa and later its anti-water campaign “H2No” drew much criticism. For decades unsuspecting populations around the world realized too late that their rightful drinking water resources had been commercialized and depleted by companies like Coca-Cola, as revealed by Maude Barlow in her seminal book “Blue Gold,” published in 2004.
But climate change poses a much more sinister and efficient threat to aquifers around the world than Coke ever could. Now that climate-caused droughts in India and Africa are wreaking havoc with water tables and agricultural production, Coca-Cola sees a risk to its corporate bottom line. In a Jan. 23, 2014, New York Times article, journalist Coral Davenport declares, “Coca-Cola now embraces the idea of climate change as an economically disruptive force.”
Better late than not at all — even if the company’s motivation is self-serving and it ignores its own environmentally and socially disruptive forces. What could it mean to have one of the titans of global commerce interested in fighting shoulder to shoulder with social and environmental interest groups to reduce carbon in the atmosphere? Could there be a better match for the oil and coal interests bent on increasing their production of carbon producing fossil fuels? Let the games begin!
Here in Vermont we have a governor who won’t support a carbon pricing bill, because he believes that Vermonters would not back him in that effort.
But wait, lest we become giddy about this revelation on the part of our commercial giant. There is still a lot of work ahead. The oil and gas lobby is playing a cozy defense, the Europeans are relaxing their environmental regulations out of economic fears — and the U.S. Congress is in gridlock, holding the president hostage.
Here in Vermont we have a governor who won’t support a carbon pricing bill, because he believes that Vermonters would not back him in that effort. And even if they did, he thinks that Vermont shouldn’t go it alone.
With all due respect to our hardworking governor who is focused on important issues such as health care, the budget, and opiate addiction, a strong lobby of Vermonters favors a carefully crafted, income-sensitive, carbon pricing mechanism for Vermont that would serve as a model for the nation. After all, this strategy cuts to the chase and treats the underlying problem of climate change, not just the symptoms.
Beyond these many citizens and organizations in Vermont, several global commercial interests are working hard behind the scenes to develop a unified position on climate policy. For example, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, California billionaire Thomas Steyer and others are conducting a study called “Risky Business.”
Paulson, referring to the study in an October 2013 Bloomberg.com interview, made the case that business leaders are not adequately focused on the economic impact of climate change.
While many Republicans oppose the idea of a tax on carbon pollution, some conservative economists endorse the idea. Commenting on climate change, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, head of the conservative think tank American Action Forum, said, “There will be agricultural and economic effects; it’s inescapable.” He added, “I’d be shocked if people supported anything other than a carbon tax — that’s how economists think about it.”
The opportunity is building for diverse interests to join forces and effectively fight climate change. Let’s make sure Vermont is part of that effort. We’ve got your back governor — that’s how Vermonters think about it.
