ESG Is Complete Nonsense (mostly)

An exercise in Fake Virtue Signalling and widely value destruction.

Inside Paradeplatz 47 47 Kommentare 6.900

Environmental. Social. Governance. Three great buzzwords.

Do good. In all three areas that are most important to us as human beings. Do good for the environment. Do good for the planet.

And sell a whole lot of new products off the back of it.

A sustainable explosion? (Morningstar)

Does any of this actually make sense?

Start, to paraphrase the Hippocratic oath; in the first place: „Don’t make the situation worse“. And go from there.

Some facts. Some calling out of bullshit.

Whenever people start talking about ESG, selling product and other Bullshit, it’s worth keeping a few statistics in mind.

As a species we are incredibly common. And widespread. Humans make up, by mass, 36% of all mammal biomass.

So, a little over one third of all mammal mass on Earth are human beings. Us. One third. By weight. It’s a lot.

We’re not particularly big either, there’s just lots of us.

A further 60% of mammalian mass on earth are domesticated animals.

Cattle, pigs, sheep, cats, dogs, mice, hamsters, etc. I.e., stuff that human beings like and find useful.

Only about 4% of the total mammalian mass left on this planet is wild.

Think about that for a minute. 4% of mammalian mass on this planet is wild. That’s it. 200 years into the industrial revolution.

Wild is rare (Our World In Data)

Let’s take a look at the birds next. 70% of birds on earth, in 2023, around 33 billion of them, are chickens.

Yup, the domestic chicken. Gallus Gallus. And each year around 65 billion crack their shells to enter life as the dominant bird form.

About 65 billion chickens also lose their heads each year. To feed… Yes, Us.

Gallus Gallus! (Our World In Data; Clements Checklist)

The next time you bite on that piece of chicken, you are chewing down on the most successful avian species in Earths history. In numbers. And weight.

Not that 99.9% of them get to enjoy their success, mostly being raised in an environment where they are packed wing to wing, feel miserable, get fed recycled garbage mixed with assorted chemicals to make them grow faster (six weeks to the guillotine) and have their neighbours rain their shit down upon them.

Then get their heads chopped off in the prime of life.

Let’s take mass itself. Like, everything. All mass. On Earth.

As a whole, the total mass of human produced material, as of 2020, is about equal to the total mass of all living material on earth.

Yup, the „stuff“ we have produced is about the same weight as all living mass on earth. Including the microbes.

Given the total weight of microbes, it’s a hell of a lot of man-made „stuff“.

If we were to sample planet Earth today the same way a paleontologist samples the fossil record we would look at the distribution of bones and conclude that something very, very strange was going on.

1 So much of the vertebrate biomass is made up of so few species.

2 This would be a catastrophic environmental damage and destruction event.

3 This would be classified as a mass extinction event. (Like, Asteroid impact, wiping out three quarters of all species extinction event stuff)

Over the last 50 years, the biomass of wildlife has declined at an enormous rate. Rather, been destroyed at an enourmous rate.

In 1978 there were two and half times as many wild vertebrates living as in 2018.

In 50 years mankind has exterminated more than half of all living individual vertebrates on this planet.

Exterminated by Us (Living Planet Index)

Since the last Ice Age ended about 10’000 years ago, all of the largest species on every continent have been exterminated by human beings or are on their way to extinction due to human beings.

Planet Earth is beginning to resemble a post extinction event biosystem.

It’s worth bearing all this in mind the next time somebody’s pitching some ESG crap to you, or some media publication is getting hysterical about the next ESG fad and how it’s „gonna save the world!!!“.

The human ecosystem, which human beings are responsible for and benefits human beings, is something of a monument to monoculture.

It does benefit a small bunch of niche players, a small group of versatile creatures able to live off the refuse, rubbish, waste humans produce.

For example, rats, mice, European foxes, raccoons, seagulls, or pigeons. Then there are animals that we have teamed up with, domesticated, or bred for our own purposes. Chickens, cattle, sheep, cats, dogs, in particular, thrive.

This is one way of looking at it.

Another way of looking at it is that human induced change can to a large extent be considered natural.

Since human beings are part of the biosphere. We also inhabit the tree of life and there is pretty good evidence that human beings, like so many species that have come before us (we are certainly not the first to be here) are more or less natural ecosystem engineers.

Human beings have been creating pastures and so forth for the last 8’000 to 10’000 years and the burning of forests and grasslands etc. changed parts of the world, how they reflect sunlight, absorb heat, create weather patterns and so forth.

What is new is that changes to the planet as a result of all this, for the first time in geological or even human history, apart from events like asteroid strikes or volcanic explosions and the like, are happening so fast, the changes are experienced in real time.

Like one mammalian lifetime time. Rather than the tens or hundreds of mammalian lifetimes previously. Previously, when things changed, mammals either moved their communities around in response to the changes in the environment, gradually.

Or died out, gradually.

This is different. Right now, the planet is undergoing a humanitarian and natural disaster encompassing the entire planet.

It is something that theoretically can be managed but it doesn’t look like the human species is doing a very good job of it.

Nestle and like companies are producing several billion plastic bottles a year, dumping a goodly percentage in the oceans, just as an example.

Then spending billion of dollars in Fake Virtue Signalling advertising and marketing. This is not helpful.

It is highly destructive behaviour. No matter which „ESG ETF“ you package it in.

With ESG and the like, be aware that everything that we do has an impact on the environment.

Newton’s third law: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

ESG as it is being sold is mostly complete nonsense.

There is no such thing as sustainable development because most everything human beings now do involves the extraction and consumption of finite resources in one way or another.

There is only a system and balance of trade-offs.There is no such thing as „Carbon-Neutral“ or any other neutral. It’s nonsense.

There is only pricing. Efficient and non-efficient. Right now, more non-efficient and looking to me like laced with some serious psychedelics.

All that said, personally, I think ESG overall is a very good thing. At least it’s creating some awareness. It is getting the discussion happening.

It is affecting policy.

Message: When looking at ESG „stuff“, ask the basic question, „Does whatever it is, make the situation, better? Or worse?“

Kommentare

Kommentieren

Bitte beachten Sie unsere Regeln. Ihre E-Mail Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Benötigte Felder sind markiert. *

Die beliebtesten Kommentare

  1. Echt jetzt? Das kommt ja nun wohl total überraschend. Niemand hätte gedacht, dass es sich bei ESG um ein Propagandainstrument…

    Lesen

  3. Oh thunderwetter yur inglisch is fantastic! Wieso wird so ein Schrott in einer Sprache verfasst, derer der Verfasser ganz offensichtlich…

    Lesen

  1. The only significant challenge we face in the realm of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) is the engagement of individuals in ESG roles within companies who lack the necessary background – like this author. ESG is fundamentally about compliance, reporting, and risk management. The content discussed here under the ESG umbrella actually pertains to Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). To effectively navigate the complexities of ESG and Sustainability, it’s crucial to appoint individuals with solid backgrounds in engineering, science, and law. These fields provide the requisite expertise for making informed decisions and contributions in these areas. Employing individuals simply because they seek to make an „impact“ in their careers, or those who offer opinions without the necessary qualifications, undermines the effectiveness of ESG initiatives. This concern extends to commentary from individuals without the appropriate knowledge, underscoring the need for expertise in the discourse surrounding ESG and Sustainability.

    Antworten

  3. Was ist denn das für Blocher English ..mein Gott schreib doch lieber auf deutsch obwohl du Recht hast mit dem Inhalt

    Antworten

  4. thunderweather Lucki, your englisch is very good, all this criticsim overrushs me, the negative comments should to you be saussage – because their primordial lifters are heavy on the woodway! So don’t let it make you sour or play the offended liver sausage. I think you write like a native.

    Antworten

    • @den lieben Herr „singing club“
      Sensationell!
      Outstanding Cambridge English.
      Just love it!

  5. So, in fact, what you are saying is that it is not an E or S problem, but rather a G problem having to do with honesty and ethics of the people selling it and the people consuming. In other words, greenwashing, greed and waste.

    Antworten

    • Wenn man den Text mit starkem Schweizer Akzent spricht, wird’s verständlicher.

  12. Nachhaltig wäre u.a. VERZICHT, aber fast niemand spricht davon. Diejenigen, die ESG fördern, sind Leute mit kristallklaren Geldinteressen und sie wollen ihr Geld vermehren. Ihnen ist der Planet völlig egal. Sie haben nur rausgefunden, dass sie damit noch mehr Geld verdienen können. Zudem lassen sich die Leute besser versklaven, wenn sie glauben, dass sie etwas gutes tun. Was mich am meisten aufregt sind die Nachhaltigkeitstypen in meiner Firma: Sie wollen grosse Dinge verändern, aber bei sich im Kleinen nicht anfangen.

    Antworten

  14. Unter dem Stichwort Green Tomorrow gibt es bis 28. März an der Expo Doha noch mehr Statikstik zum Thema Mammals und ESG.
    Eintrittfrei. Wer denkt, dass es am Schweizer Pavillion Rösti oder Schoggi gibt – irrt sich – dort verkaufen ein paar Engländer Glace.
    Im Pavillion der Nation of Plants findet man mehr Infos über die Hühner auf Erden.

    Mit ESG verdienen Hochschulabsolventen, und sonstige Berater gutes Geld. Die ESG ETF sind deswegen auch 2 bis 3 mal so teuer wie normale ETF.
    Green Bonds ist ein weiteres Buzzwort um die Einkommen von Investmentbankern zu mehren.

    Antworten

  15. Diesen ganzen, strullenlangen Artikel in eine Frage gepackt:

    Was hatte die Erde davon, dass es den Menschen gab?

    j-kiss (just keep it short and simple!)

    Antworten

  16. oh my lovely God! Here again comes a horrable report of some self-named „Experts“. These Prapperli are not more then farters of hot air in the room! It must be a mirror of the poor society that they always bring a bag with shit to the morning table instead of a wonderful Bircher Muesli! How long do we have to endure this minor journalism tolerably?

    Antworten

  19. Echt jetzt?

    Das kommt ja nun wohl total überraschend.

    Niemand hätte gedacht, dass es sich bei ESG um ein Propagandainstrument der Linken handelt und vor allem Politikern und Beratern nützt, aber weder der Umwelt, den Stakeholdern noch den Mitarbeitern.

    Rein gar niemand. Wirklich. Totale Überraschung.

    Antworten

  20. Thank you Klaus Schwab

    Das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) hat eine bedeutende Rolle bei der Förderung von ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) Standards und Praktiken gespielt. Das WEF bringt Regierungsvertreter, Unternehmen, internationale Organisationen und andere Interessengruppen zusammen, um Lösungen für globale Herausforderungen zu diskutieren. Innerhalb dieses Rahmens hat das WEF die Bedeutung von ESG-Faktoren für die langfristige wirtschaftliche Stabilität und nachhaltiges Wachstum betont und dazu beigetragen, die ESG-Agenda auf die politische und wirtschaftliche Tagesordnung zu setzen.

    Antworten

    • in einem hatte Klaus Schwab vollkommen recht: in 10 Jahren werdet ihr nichts mehr besitzen – doch ich werdet glücklich sein. Das hat er 2014 das erste Mal erwähnt!

  22. Lassen Sie doch englische Titel wenn Sie die Sprache nicht beherrschen
    ESG is complete nonsense (mostly) is a contradiction in terms
    ESG is mostly nonsense is correct

    Antworten

    • Titel zu Artikeln werden üblicherweise nicht von den Autoren, sondern von der Redaktion gesetzt.

  23. People with a brain recognized this ESG-BS long ago.

    But most people out there don’t really care about the environment, about nature or about any animal/human being having a better life.
    No, they just simply want to belong to the flock. And when that very flock bleats out „No CO2“, so will they. And if the flock is doing silly, stupid, moronic things, so are they.

    Like buying ESG-rated funds at twice the price of any other fund out there. Herd instinct beats the average brain in 99% of cases.

    Antworten

  25. Aus Sicht der Finanzindustrie heisst ESG 1. Money, 2. Money, 3. Money. Die Banken ziehen die Kunden über den Tisch, dass sie die dabei entstehende Hitze als angenehme Nestwärme empfinden.

    Antworten

    • die künstliche Intelligenz ist momentan halt nur noch die einzig nachhaltige. bei der menschlichen Intelligenz kommen immer mehr Zweifel auf!

  29. ESG wurde „erfunden“, um die KMUs platt zu machen. Der größte Scam, zusammen mit der CO2-Lüge. Blackrock, Vanguard und Fidelity sind die Menschenfeinde.

    Antworten

    • SBB – damit sie auch in Zukunft noch etwas von unserem Business verstehen!

  31. Oh thunderwetter yur inglisch is fantastic! Wieso wird so ein Schrott in einer Sprache verfasst, derer der Verfasser ganz offensichtlich nicht mächtig ist? Da wäre die google translator Übersetzung um Welten besser gewesen.

    Was willst Du Deinen Lesern noch zumuten, Lukas?!

    Antworten

    • I see auch nur noch Schwarz, in that Hinsicht,
      what dö Hell is bloss los, in this fugging Contry?

© 2024 Inside Paradeplatz
G