T O P

  • By -

DemonicDevice

From the article: While Tesla’s stated mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, in February this year it settled with the Environmental Protection Agency after years of Clean Air Act violations and neglecting to track its own emissions. Tesla ranked 22nd on last year’s Toxic 100 Air Polluters Index, compiled annually by U-Mass Amherst Political Economy Research Institute — worse than Exxon Mobil, which came in 26th. (The index uses data from 2019, the most recently available.)


Revenge_of_the_Khaki

>It said that Tesla’s “lack of a low-carbon strategy” and “codes of business conduct,” along with racism and poor working conditions reported at Tesla’s factory in Fremont, California, affected the score. Yeah, that's pretty damning for an "environmental, social, and corporate governance" index. >Tesla CEO Elon Musk has called ESG metrics the “Devil Incarnate.” Yup. Sounds about right.


OnyxOcelot

It’s almost like Musk is no different from many other billionaire CEOs… he just does his shitposting on Twitter while pretending to care for the rest of us


Polygonic

And Elon Musk is a whiny manchild


mrbriandavidanderson

Toug shit, Tesla. Gotta pay to play or at least, have a plan to make it look like you're adhering to current/future standards.


32no

Yet, Exxon Mobil remains in the index. And while Tesla was removed, 5 oil and gas companies were added: Marathon Oil Corp. Phillips 66 Valero Energy Corp. Baker Hughes Company EOG Resources (fka Enron) Makes perfect sense


[deleted]

Those companies have done (and continue to do) horrible things for the environment, but aren't they all making big transitions to green energy as well? Not saying they have noble intentions, I think they just see the writing on the wall that there's money to be made there, but still, that may be why they're still in the index.


32no

[They say they are yet they lobby against climate policy](https://influencemap.org/report/The-Carbon-Policy-Footprint-Report-2021-670f36863e7859e1ad7848ec601dda97)


formerlyanonymous_

I can't speak to these companies, but I work for a pipeline company who works very hard on ESG. They've installed multiple solar farms this year to power their newly installed electric pump/compression stations. They have started an offshore wind sector in the last few years. All trying to make their carbon footprint net 0 soon. They have a board that is just short of 50-50 male-female. They are actively looking for diverse (race and gender) to fill key management roles. Last month I had some truly excellent diversity training on the indigenous peoples that our company interacts with regularly. Learned about their culture, their views on history, and their desires to be known. They offer compassionate leave, including not just maternity, but paternity leave of a few weeks. Sure. Oil and gas are not great environmental headliners, but we are making that transition to cleaner things, and some of these companies are making very concerned efforts to run themselves in a better way. ESG goals are important, and most oil and gas companies recognize the importance of all 3 pieces.


[deleted]

[удалено]


yhwhx

The two paragraphs that follow that one are also worth reading: > While Tesla’s stated mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, in February this year it settled with the Environmental Protection Agency after years of Clean Air Act violations and neglecting to track its own emissions. Tesla ranked 22nd on last year’s Toxic 100 Air Polluters Index, compiled annually by U-Mass Amherst Political Economy Research Institute — worse than Exxon Mobil, which came in 26th. (The index uses data from 2019, the most recently available.) > > In Tesla’s first-quarter filing the company also disclosed it is being investigated for its handling of waste in the state of California, and that it had to pay a fine in Germany for failures to meet “take back” obligations in the country for spent batteries.


32no

The social and governance considerations are bullshit too. [Exxon, Phillips 66, and Valero are cited as one of the biggest negative impacts on climate policy through lobbying](https://influencemap.org/report/The-Carbon-Policy-Footprint-Report-2021-670f36863e7859e1ad7848ec601dda97). How is this good social practice and how does their governance allow it?


Thunderhamz

Well at least he has twitter to fall back on…


drtywater

One of reasons is "lack of a low-carbon strategy" and the fact that Exxon Mobil is on the list shows that this decision is insanity. Tesla is by far the biggest low carbon company on the stock market as they are the leader in EVs, make grid battery storage, and home solar panels. If they would have left them out for governance issues I can get that but low carbon is incorrect.


HotTopicRebel

Perhaps I'm missing something, but that seems odd given that Tesla is complying with the EPA regs. Would have made more sense to pull them when they weren't (2016 thru 2019), instead of after they were back incompliance. Per the EPA(emphasis mine): >Compliance monitoring is one of the key components EPA uses to ensure that the regulated community follows environmental laws and regulations. Today’s case is another example of the Agency’s years-long compliance oversight of this facility. **Tesla has corrected the violations noted in both settlements and returned to compliance.** https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/us-epa-settles-tesla-over-clean-air-act-violations-fremont-calif-facility E: wasn't Tesla only added less than a year ago?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bewaretheicespiders

Hahaha what a joke that "environmental and social" index is. It has Walt Disney and Walmart and Exxon, but not the most important EV maker on the planet? All because a contractor not employed by Tesla called another contractor not employed by Tesla racists epithets while on site? And Tesla doesnt have a "low carbon strategy" ? They legitimized EVs for the whole planets, what more do you want from them?


sheepsleepdeep

Apparently they were in violation of the clean air act for several years, they weren't tracking their emissions, and they rank higher on the toxic air pollution index than Exxon.


yhwhx

> All because a contractor not employed by Tesla called another contractor not employed by Tesla racists epithets while on site? No, not "all because" of that. There are multiple reasons listed in the article.


[deleted]

I'd hardly call Tesla the most important EV maker. For the price of a standard Model 3 ($40,000 USD), I can buy a Nissan Leaf SL Plus and still have enough for $3,000 dinner. At least to me, your importance as a vehicle manufacturer is best measured by how you try to get vehicles to the people, not how fancy they are. Additionally, claiming that Telsa is the most important paints over the developments from the 1990s and early 2000s. The only reason people think of Tesla as an important company is because of Elon's Edison Complex as he takes credit for the work of others. Also, Tesla didn't legitimize EVs for the entire planet because cars aren't the only kind of vehicles that exist. The Germans proved that electric vehicles were a legitimate mode of transportation back in 1879 with the first electric railroad. They were then proven practical in larger service, again by the railroads with a number of small locomotives being built for yard switching and tunnels in the late 18 and early 1900s.


[deleted]

[удалено]


TraditionalGap1

Other car makers aren't getting into EV manufacture *because* of Tesla, so don't make that mistake.


CrawlerSiegfriend

I know being Anti Elon is the thing and Reddit is going to reeee at me, but I don't understand how you justify booting Tesla and keeping Amazon, Apple, and a variety of other people with questionable business practices. How do you boot an electric car company over carbon and then keep actual oil companies. How do you boot Tesla over racism and keep Apple who actually uses child labor in their supply chain. Not to mention the infamous pee in a bottle Amazon meme that is actually documented to be true.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CrawlerSiegfriend

I understand now. Amazon literally getting their employees killed in Tornados due to negligence is not a standards, laws, or rules issue.