With frequent reports abuzz covering the Koch brothers’ lobbying activity, and the GOP Super PAC building team ostensibly thwarting any efforts to substantiate man-made climate change, it is safe to wonder where financial support for the influences of the EPA or the IPCC come from. Otherwise indicating global warming is missing financial incentive in order to resonate as a real problem.
In the beginning of the year, President Obama deployed a list of climate conscientious orders to the State Department including shirking funding to many coal projects overseas as well as financing giant solar farms in the Mojave desert. These efforts are in tandem with the EPA regulating carbon pollution from thousands of power plants through newly written climate rules. Yet what such austere measures in relation to energy behavior and conservation faces is the impediment of big business, begging the question of where the monetizing benefits lay in being environmentally sound minded.
With the exception of perhaps Monsanto purchasing The Climate Corporation, a data science company built to help farmers prepare for inclement weather in relation to their crops, at the price of $930 million, business transactions related to preservation and environmental awareness are sparse in the media. And the aforementioned is a stretch in significance considering Monsanto has been under a critical microscope for genetically modifying their products for capital gain – further proving global warming is missing financial incentive. So what will it take to veer investor motivation away from oil and into more sustainable sources in the name of capping ozone threatening emanates?
There is hope in certain cases with report of something like the Heartland Institute, a prominent think-tank encouraging skepticism toward man-made climate change, losing an estimated $825,000 in anticipated donations. However that doesn’t equate to such funds conversely being funneled into something like wind power and solar panels. What is proven, however, are companies like Koch Industries scurrying to secure their method of energy in oil is the superior form the globe over. And they will do it in the form of a reported $67 million given to climate-denial front groups that are working to delay policies and regulations implemented to reverse global-warming.
Perhaps in place of astronomical funds is the traction global-warming is starting to get in news coverage. Ann Curry hosts a one-hour documentary reporting on an angle of climate change that is rarely found on TV: that “there is virtually no debate among climate scientists”–climate change is real and “largely caused by human activity.” It remains to be seen what sort of impact such a program will have, and whether it can draw the kind of financial investment needed to not only glean more concern toward the issue of global warming, but also further the development of sustainable energy methods.
There’s yet to be a Koch brother equivalent when it comes to mogul activity interested in the betterment of our climate, since the issue of global warming is missing financial incentive as well as a superior money-making source of energy working in its favor.
Commentary by Lindsey Shaw