The model of pressuring tech companies to go green doesn't apply to major industrial emitters like oil and steel. For them, the cost of eliminating emissions can be several times their annual profit, a cost no shareholder base would voluntarily accept.
China's dominance in clean energy technology presents a deep paradox: it is funded by fossil fuels. Manufacturing solar panels, batteries, and EVs is incredibly energy-intensive. To meet this demand, China is increasing its coal imports and consumption, simultaneously positioning itself as a climate 'saint' for its green exports and a 'sinner' for its production methods.
Citing a Harvard Business School study of 1,800 companies, Sir Ronald Cohen reveals the staggering scale of negative externalities. A third of these firms (600) cause environmental damage equivalent to a quarter or more of their profits, while 250 create more damage than they make in profit, highlighting the financial materiality of impact.
The idea that we only need political will to deploy existing climate tech is flawed. While solar and EVs are viable, critical, high-emission sectors like concrete, steel, aviation, and shipping do not yet have commercially scalable green technologies.
Despite the narrative of a transition to clean energy, renewables like wind and solar are supplementing, not replacing, traditional sources. Hydrocarbons' share of global energy has barely decreased, challenging the feasibility of net-zero goals and highlighting the sheer scale of global energy demand.
Setting rigid global warming limits (e.g., 2°C) creates a finite carbon budget. Since most future emissions will come from developing countries, these caps effectively tell poorer nations they must cut projected emissions by up to 90%, forcing them to choose between development and global climate goals.
The economic model for renewable energy is the inverse of fossil fuels. While building wind or solar farms requires significant initial capital investment, their ongoing operational costs are minimal. This suggests that as Europe advances its green transition, its long-term energy cost competitiveness will dramatically improve.
Instead of focusing on marginal emissions cuts, companies should leverage their unique capabilities to solve hard problems. This means acting as early buyers for new green technologies or investing in R&D within their supply chains, creating new markets for the entire industry.
The political challenge of climate action has fundamentally changed. Renewables like solar and wind are no longer expensive sacrifices but the cheapest energy sources available. This aligns short-term economic incentives with long-term environmental goals, making the transition politically and financially viable.
Europe faces a critical conflict between its ambitious net-zero targets and its economic health. High energy costs and a heavy regulatory burden, designed without market realities in mind, are causing companies to close facilities or move investment to the U.S., forcing a difficult reassessment.
By creating the world's highest industrial electricity prices, the UK's Net Zero strategy doesn't eliminate emissions but merely offshores manufacturing to countries with laxer standards. This de-industrializes Britain, reduces national prosperity, and may even increase total global carbon output.