The Global Greenwashing Report #9

Welcome back to The Global Greenwashing Report. We have a few long reads for you this week (arghhhh....I know!). But they provide critical bits of information we all need to understand in the lead up to next week's UN climate conference in Brazil. Enjoy!

This Week’s Greenwashing Big Three

1. The Bill Gates Missive

Last week, Bill Gates released a controversial essay calling for a major shift in climate strategy. The timing and message have sparked fierce debate about whether this represents genuine climate leadership or a distraction from the outsized environmental impact of the billionaire class.

His Three Tough Truths About Climate.

1. Climate change is serious but won't end civilization Gates argues that while climate change is a significant problem requiring action, it won't lead to humanity's demise. He says "doomsday" outlooks are causing the climate community to focus too heavily on near-term emissions goals, diverting resources from more effective interventions.

2. Temperature isn't the best progress metric Instead of fixating on temperature targets, Gates proposes measuring progress through quality-of-life indicators like the UN Human Development Index.

3. Health and prosperity are the best climate defense Gates contends that lifting people out of poverty and disease is the strongest way to protect them from climate impacts. He argues that developing nations need affordable energy access, even if it temporarily increases emissions, because economic growth directly correlates with reduced climate vulnerability.

Gates' framing becomes particularly contentious given that billionaires are among the world's heaviest polluters. I talked yesterday about how each fortnight, for example, the average billionaire’s jets and yachts alone emit more pollution than the average person does in a lifetime.

Critics note the irony: a member of the world's most polluting class arguing that poverty reduction should take precedence over emissions targets, while the emissions of billionaires dwarf those of the world's poorest. This raises questions about whether such messaging deflects attention from the disproportionate climate impact of extreme wealth.

What’s been the response?

Michael Mann (Penn climate scientist) called Gates' framing "horrifying" and accused him of promoting "soft denial" by downplaying urgency. Mann argues this provides cover for delaying climate action and that "the poor are the most harmed by the devastating climate impacts we're already experiencing."

Rachel Cleetus (Union of Concerned Scientists) criticized Gates for creating a "false frame that pits improving lives against science-based temperature goals," noting these objectives are "intrinsically connected" since warming directly undermines poverty reduction.

Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia University) dismissed the memo as "pointless, vague, unhelpful and confusing," stating there's no need to choose between poverty reduction and climate transformation—both are feasible if fossil fuel interests are controlled.

This represents a notable shift from Gates' 2021 book "How to Avoid a Climate Disaster." Gates has also scaled back climate advocacy this year, closing Breakthrough Energy's policy operations and reducing grants. The timing, days before COP30, has intensified scrutiny of his message and motivations.

2. Look Mom! Time's Greenwashing Again.

Time Magazine’s just come out with its third annual Climate 100 list. If you remember last year, I pointed out the pesky fact that one of the people on the inaugural list was an ExxonMobil executive. Well, it doesn’t look like Time’s done any better with its greenwashing this time around.

Sure, you’ve got deserving names like Andrew Dempsey of REI, Cynthia Houniuhi, President of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, and Rebecca Lindsey, Project Director of Climate.us.

Then there are the head scratchers, like Samuel L. Jackson for his 60-second advert with Swedish power company, Vattenfall. Or Meg Marinis, the showrunner for Grey's Anatomy.

But I don’t want to talk about them. I want to talk about all the folks using the list to greenwash their less-than-stellar climate reputations.

Let’s start with the banks. JP Morgan is the largest fossil fuel financier in the world, committing $53.5 billion to fossil fuel companies in 2024 and $431 billion since the Paris Agreement. Standard Chartered earned the title of UK bank with the highest financing for new coal plant developers in Asia and recently financed a $3.49 billion loan for the Scarborough-Pluto LNG project, and finances Saudi Aramco, the world's biggest greenhouse gas polluter.

How about politicians? We’ve got Kathy Hochul, Governor of New York, who’s been given a grade of D- by a coalition of climate groups in October 2024 for failing to sufficiently advance emissions reductions, agency action, funding, and key policies. Since taking office in January 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom's administration has approved about 18,515 oil and gas permits, 291 fracking permits, and plans to boost the state's domestic crude oil production. Then there’s Australia’s Foreign Minister Penny Wong, who recently said, "the US relationship matters more than some domestic politics about environmental reform."

Of course, there’s a heap of companies too. Like Google, whose greenhouse gas emissions have risen by 48% since 2019, thanks to data centre energy consumption and emissions from AI. It’s gotten so bad, Google has said it is no longer "maintaining operational carbon neutrality.” Siemens Energy advocated against more stringent EPA regulation of carbon emissions, calling for "technology-agnostic" compliance pathways to facilitate a long-term role for fossil fuels. I’ve talked before about Mars and their record with child labour, too. Sure, that’s not exactly climate related, but come on.

I’m all for giving credit where it’s due, but not when you try to greenwash us into thinking you’re something else entirely. Maybe next year, Time Magazine will do a better job vetting the people on its list (but I wouldn’t hold my breath).

3. Climate Plunder

The richest 0.1% of society personally emit 400 times more CO2 each and every day than the poorest 50% of the world. If we take into account the emissions of all billionaire investments, then that figure skyrockets to 346,000 times more than the average person.

Last week, Oxfam released their new report, Climate Plunder: How a Powerful Few Are Locking the World into Disaster. Let me tell you, the findings are damning. That’s why I’ve partnered with them to get the word out, especially as lots of the world’s richest people will try to greenwash their image at this month’s United Nations climate conference in Brazil.

The numbers, though, speak for themselves.

• Since 1990, the per capita annual emissions of the 0.1% have increased by 92 tonnes. For the poorest half of humanity, that number’s only gone up by 100 kilograms.

• The investment emissions of just 308 billionaires totalled 586 million tonnes of CO2 in 2024, more than the combined emissions of 118 countries; if they were a country, they would rank as the fifteenth-most polluting country in the world.

• Each fortnight, the average billionaire’s super yacht and private jet will emit more pollution than the average person does in a lifetime.

Remember, too, billionaires have massive political and economic control. They run 17 of the world’s 50 largest listed companies. Of course, a lot of these are highly polluting. Just 36 companies, for example, produced half the world’s emissions in 2023.

So, what are we supposed to do? The report outlines a few interesting recommendations.

• Obviously number one is to cut the emissions of the ultra-wealthy. We can do this through things like permanent taxes on excess profits, climate-specific taxes, or taxing polluting luxury items heavily.

• Shut the revolving door of government officials getting jobs at fossil fuel lobbying firms.

• Limiting the control of media by rich polluters.

As COP30 begins, keep an eye out for who’s in attendance and the messages they’re pushing. Make sure to download a copy of the report, too. I’ve just barely scratched the surface of the ultra-wealthy, their impact, and what we can do about it.

---

There's plenty more greenwashing news, but let's leave it here for now.

Value these insights? Share with your board and leadership team. The organisations that prepare systemically, not just procedurally, today will be the ones leading their sectors tomorrow. Also, visit johnpabon.com to discover how authentic capability development can help your organisation capitalise on the new global environment around greenwashing.