Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

monsoon

CEO of Bank of America Named Fossil Fool of the Year

41 posts in this topic

Treehugger.com has article pointing to where the Energy Action Coalition names Ken Lewis, the CEO of Charlotte's Bank of America, the Fossil Fool of the Year (2008). This is for "The individual who has made the most significant contribution over the past year to the development and dissemination of fossil fuel-related pollution".

Why isn't the Bank more interested in financing "Green Technologies" rather than dirty coal? Could it be that it is due to Charlotte's other big user of fossil fuel, Duke Energy?

More information here. As you can see he keeps some good company. Maybe one day Charlotte could be known as an environmentally progressive city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Hah, Jim Rogers - CEO at Duke Energy - was a runner up for Greenwashing, loosing out to GM (who probably took their award home in the back of a hybrid Yukon). At this point, it does seem like Duke is waiting for Charlotte to have beach front property before they make any kind of genuine effort to pursue renewables. At least BofA is pushing sustainable strategies at the Corporate Center and in their new tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double Hah! I sent that website to a coworker who responded with this CBJ article from Tuesday:

"Bank of America Corp. says it will adopt The Carbon Principles, a set of guidelines that help lenders to power companies evaluate carbon risks in the financing of projects.

...

In related developments, the Natural Resources Defense Council will honor Lewis and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg at its 10th annual award gala Tuesday evening. Lewis will be recognized by the New York-based environmental organization for his guidance of BofA's (NYSE:BAC) efforts to address climate change."

Lord, this planet is doomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Ahh true, but one shouldn't consider the CBJ to be nothing more than a tabloid that cheerleads for big business and the chamber of commerce. I am sure we won't see this story on any of the Charlotte news programs either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when we were debating whether or not the protest against BoA had any real effect? I wonder if it influenced this "award" in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on this week's awards, is it safe to say that RAN and the NRDC do not see eye to eye on the environment? I honestly don't know very much about either. For example, the only time I ever hear anything about RAN is when they are protesting, hanging signs on cranes, or handcuffing themselves in front of bank offices. They seem to take more of an extreme approach while the NRDC seems to be a little more "mainstream" for lack of a better term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on this week's awards, is it safe to say that RAN and the NRDC do not see eye to eye on the environment? I honestly don't know very much about either. For example, the only time I ever hear anything about RAN is when they are protesting, hanging signs on cranes, or handcuffing themselves in front of bank offices. They seem to take more of an extreme approach while the NRDC seems to be a little more "mainstream" for lack of a better term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^Ahh true, but one shouldn't consider the CBJ to be nothing more than a tabloid that cheerleads for big business and the chamber of commerce. I am sure we won't see this story on any of the Charlotte news programs either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


There are a lot of things that "big business" does that is "legal". That doesn't mean that it is good for society, morally correct, or desirable. If it was, places such as UrbanPlanet and Treehugger would not need to exist. One wonders why you frequent these places if you think that it is perfectly fine for BofA, Walmart, Exxon, or any corporation to do as it pleases in the never ending pursuit of corporate profits and excessive compensation for its executives.

Maybe I am missing something but there was a time when the USA did invest in unproven infant technologies to reshape our country for the betterment of people. Have those days passed now? Or could it be we don't do that anymore because these same corporations are also shipping millions of jobs overseas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One wonders why you frequent these places if you think that it is perfectly fine for BofA, Walmart, Exxon, or any corporation to do as it pleases in the never ending pursuit of corporate profits and excessive compensation for its executives.

Maybe I am missing something but there was a time when the USA did invest in unproven infant technologies to reshape our country for the betterment of people. Have those days passed now? Or could it be we don't do that anymore because these same corporations are also shipping millions of jobs overseas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can you criticize it then by implying that it isn't fair or accurate? If if you never read the article about the CEO of BofA in funding dirty coal, how can you form a valid opinion? "I'm sorry, but Treehugger.com is a fairness and accuracy-in-journalism stalwart?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have documented here many times, prior to this article about the lame "reporting" if you can call it that of the business journal. It's often incorrect, takes whatever a developer or person of authority says without any question, and beyond reporting what could be considered gossip really doesn't offer up anything that isn't already known. I guess if you are a developer its a good way to get some free advertizing for whatever you are doing, but I don't see how it could be considered a useful tool for information on good urban development and/or policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have documented here many times, prior to this article about the lame "reporting" if you can call it that of the business journal. It's often incorrect, takes whatever a developer or person of authority says without any question, and beyond reporting what could be considered gossip really doesn't offer up anything that isn't already known. I guess if you are a developer its a good way to get some free advertizing for whatever you are doing, but I don't see how it could be considered a useful tool for information on good urban development and/or policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here-here commoner, a fine retort and realistic point of view. Everyone has an agenda.

Often people enjoy jabbing at our little city as opposed to applauding the changes. Wasn't long ago that Trade and Tryon was where you found drugs and prostitution. These big banks have turned it into a place with families taking photos. Praise be to these banks that built our city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Like most business news organizations, the CBJ prints press releases interspersed with local stories about new developments and how awesome they'll be for man, society and God.

Treehugger is... well, it's a far-left blog. Like a lot of far-anything they post some pretty absurd stuff without shame. But at least with Treehugger and other blogs the comments can help flesh out a subject a little bit more.

Edit - Fossil Fool, I think, could be considered a reaction to a paper like CBJ. The former doing nothing but criticizing corporate America and the latter doing nothing but supporting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....

Often people enjoy jabbing at our little city as opposed to applauding the changes. Wasn't long ago that Trade and Tryon was where you found drugs and prostitution. These big banks have turned it into a place with families taking photos. Praise be to these banks that built our city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..... The unwashed masses are more likely to be amused or irritated by their tactics than they are to even attempt to identify with their message(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that downtown is very sterile. By jabs, I mean I hear many people (mostly old school Charlotteans) who bash the downtown arena, the train, the Banks, the streetcar, the price of downtown condos, and the city in general. I'm thankful for the city's direction, it's much more progessive and clean than any other comparable city.

That ties back to the topic of Ken Lewis and Coal. His organization is doing it's job. He's sooo far removed from those decisions it's laughable. However, people still pin the devil tag on his lapel b/c they don't like what his company stands for (sustainable profit)...maybe it's just the republican in me. They tend to be good citizens too. This city would be the same scary, dirty city w/o their citizenship. Without this, noone would be talking about this town. Conversations like "hey let's move to Charlotte" wouldn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.... However, people still pin the devil tag on his lapel b/c they don't like what his company stands for (sustainable profit)...maybe it's just the republican in me. They tend to be good citizens too. This city would be the same scary, dirty city w/o their citizenship. Without this, noone would be talking about this town. Conversations like "hey let's move to Charlotte" wouldn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's been replaced by the republican philosophy of deny deny deny and if that doesn't work then deny it again. Eventually people believe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^If you note, I did not bring up the issue of republican vs democrat. Maybe you should direct your criticism towards the party that started it if you have an issue with it. Even better, why don't you follow the rules and send a PM if you have an issue with a post on this topic.

.....

BofA shouldn't be in the business of regulating a perceived morality issue, ie the new religion of global warming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^If you note, I did not bring up the issue of republican vs democrat. Maybe you should direct your criticism towards the party that started it if you have an issue with it. Even better, why don't you follow the rules and send a PM if you have an issue with a post on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only only as to go to where the coal is mined to see the ecological damage caused by strip mining, blowing away entire mountains...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't waste your breath Monsoon. Anyone who considers global warming a religion isn't worth discussing science with.

Seriously, global warming deniers need to either put up soon or forever shut the eff up. When a political scientist is the leading voice of dissent, and when most of the doubters haven't taken a hard science course since they were in high school (versus the legion of MIT, CalTech, Mellon, etc. PhDs who've spent decades of their lives studying the phenomenon and have yet to find a single shred of contrary data worthy of publication), the religious fervor eminates from people who often find themselves aligned with creationists, not from the scientists.

One other thing: how does a publication, silly or no, suddenly become far left for pointing out that the energy and financial industries are screwing the pooch? That would be like saying that a magazine smacks of fascism simply for pointing out that government isn't always especially efficient. Cue the Dragnet music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.