@mario_de_vries
55 w
Advertisements for fossil products, such as transport using fossil fuels (SAS in this case), intentionally boost sales for fossil fuel products which increase greenhouse gas emissions. On a rapidly heating planet, advertisement for even more emissions is simply immoral. Please review your practice Clear Channel, this includes advertising meat consumption causing deforestation and methane emissions. (you state to wish for a better society on your own billboards).
16 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
76 w
I was really moved when seeing this commercial by Norwegian Postal Services 'Posten'. It makes even more sense in a country where we consume about 4 times of what the planet could possibly support, if everyone would like the same lifestyle as Norwegians. Meaning we would need 4 planets. https://youtu.be/cRM5PpsAH4g
150 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
•
76 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate love to level 2! We have reached out to Posten Norge and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Muhammad We Don't Have Time
82 w
Each and every email we send, and store on a server, needs a tiny bit of energy. One spam email, depending on its size, costs about 0.03g of CO₂ in sending and hosting. Almost all of the 120 000 000 000 000 spam emails sent daily, will end up directly in a spamfolder and will never be looked at. By introducing a tax on spam emails, we could save millions of tons of CO₂ per year on wasted energy.
101 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
59 w
That's good idea, it needs implementation
•
82 w
The lifetime climate-neutral are exempt from carbon taxation. Any tax should go to carbon creditors (every individual who has removed from the atmosphere more greenhouse gas than she ever caused to be emitted). Any carbon tax should offset the net emitter's carbon emissions.
•
•
81 w
That's a great idea! I wonder how complicated it would be to implement it
102 w
Every steak needs approximately 3500L of water to 'produce'. Every cow belches about 100kg of methane per year (one of the most potent greenhouse gasses). A cow needs almost 4000kg of food per year. There's about 1.4 billion (1,400,000,000) cows kept globally. The moral repulsion set aside, the bio industry is a massive contributor to the unfolding global climate disaster. So why do we still advertise it?
84 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
102 w
Coop needs to be held responsible for this!
104 w
In order to inspire customers to invest their money with a green conscience, Nordnet offers several funds with exposure to sustainable companies. However, after a bit of digging it shows some of these funds have exposure to companies operating landfills and gascompanies. In my opinion this is not only misleading, it's also a mendacious practice which doesn't match the zeitgeist. I would really like Nordnet to seriously review their fund caterogies and adjust their communication accordingly.
31 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
104 w
It's not really a story. I saw it myself while looking for investment opportunities. I wanted to discover companies that work with renewables. I then started to look what's in all of these funds (they're like baskets of stocks). To my surprise very few of these environmental funds actually live up to what they pretend to be. Now, technically nothing illegal is happening here. However, in my opinion it's very cynical to name a fund 'Climate & Environment' and fill it with companies operating landfills, no matter how good they are with capturing methane emissions.
118 w
'In our new advertising campaign, we take a clear stand against what we believe to be outdated attitudes. At Storebrand, we believe those who solve tomorrow's challenges are also tomorrow's winners. That's why we're taking a hit to invest in the solutions of the future!' Have a look at the campaign here (sorry, it's in Norwegian): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN1w5XpN4-Y&t=1s
63 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
117 w
I must add however that Storebrand still manages a series of funds with large positions within oil giants such as Equinor and Aker BP. So this commercial should be seen as a message to their own customers. Should it be a climate warning instead? I'm confused..
•
•
•
118 w
This is the future!
122 w
I'm really enthousiastic about Swedish start-up Urb-it and I think they deserve some climate love on the We don't have time platform. I really hope they'll make it to Oslo at some point. What they say about themselves: Our customer-centric last mile delivery services are conducted by our couriers on foot, bike and our e-cargo fleet. This reduces noise pollution, air pollution and congestion - creating healthier communities. The way we deliver means we are more reliable and efficient than traditional methods in last mile deliveries, as we move through urban areas quicker. We deliver urban logistics services that create a positive impact on society & the environment.
110 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
•
120 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate love to level 2! We have reached out to Urb-it and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
•
121 w
Fewer emissions in the city centres, we need more like urb it
124 w
Livestock is estimated to be responsible for around 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions and a direct link to deforestation, it seems in popular terms a low-hanging fruit to sharply reduce the demand for leather products in order to reduce methane emissions and deforestation. As I am working in the home furnishing industry, I am very much looking forward to see furniture manufacturers following Volvo’s example in banning leather from their products. Therefore I would like to challenge iconic furniture brand Vitra to take the lead in making the furniture industry leather free!
104 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
•
123 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate idea to level 2! We have reached out to Vitra and asked what they think. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
•
124 w
I totally agree with you Douglas! However, I think the symbolic value of a leather ban would put even more emphasis on the environmental impact of meat consumption. And it would be a very clear signal from a high-end furniture manufacturer to a consumergroup with a big impact. But yes, the net-emmission wouldn't change much, a consumer mindset might..?
•
124 w
@mario_de_vries I applaud the ambition with this post, but the only way to lower emissions from cattle is to lower beef demand, in my opinion. Hard leather is a low value co-product of the meat industry and would be otherwise wasted (except soft calf and lamb skins which high value). The market price of hard leather has fallen 70% in the past seven years, while beef prices have increased 30%. This shows that leather has no real impact on the economics of the beef industry. This means if hard leather is removed from the furniture industry then that industry will need to increase resource use of fibers and synthetics to substitute the leather, while at the same time the same amount of cattle will still be raised for beef. The real net effect would be a global increase in GHG emissions. Some data on leather prices: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PHIDEUSDA Some data on beef prices: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PBEEFUSDM
134 w
Methane leakages happen during extraction and transportation of gas. Methane is a so called super greenhouse gas, which serves as a turbo on climate change. Companies such as Gazprom need to shape up in the maintenance of their gas infrastructure in order to bring methane leakages to a minimum.
123 more agrees trigger social media ads
Pinned by We Don't Have Time
•
•
•
134 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your Climate Warning to level 2! We have reached out to Gazprom and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Sarah We Don't Have Time
•
134 w
There are many things they can do to prevent methane leakage, some are as simple as tightening a nut or adding a gasket. These things save the company money as well as reducing the obvious environmental damage natural gas has on our planet.
•
134 w
No idea. Costs and corruption I guess? But ExxonMobil and some other American firms aren't really delivering on this topic either but leakages in the former Soviet Union are, after China, one the biggest globally. Mostly due to sloppy maintenance over the past 6 decades. This should be so high on the agenda. It's low hanging fruit in popular terms.
•
134 w
Why not fix it!?
137 w
I remember the highly effective Montréal Protocol in which CFK gasses in refrigerators and spray cans where largely banned. I guess now it's time to ban all laundry machines that come without a PlanetCare microfiber filter from the European market in order to reduce the amount microplastics in ecosystems.
40 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
137 w
Yes, absolutely, it should've been done years ago.
•
137 w
Yea. Not so much to do with reducing global warming. But nonetheless, I think 'we don't have time' is a good platform to raise the issue.
•
•
137 w
That's a great idea for fighting microplastics
145 w
One simply can't set aside a court ruling. A reduction in emissions of 45% before 2030 is not realistic according to c.e.o. Ben van Beurden. I think it's not realistic to further postpone significant efforts to lower CO2 emissions. https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2021/jul/29/shell-raises-dividend-soaring-oil-prices
89 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
•
138 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate warning to level 2! We have reached out to Shell and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
•
145 w
Shell is perpetuating Climate Change , unless their emissions are Zero there can be no way they can take any credit
146 w
Since the entire planet is under threat, I think it deserves a special status as world heritage by UNESCO. The obligation we all have to take care of our own surroundings needs to be explicitly expressed and enforced.
79 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
•
138 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate love to level 2! We have reached out to UNESCO and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
•
146 w
That's a brilliant idea. involvement of UNESCO might ensure that proper care to the endangered planet is ensued.
•
•
•
146 w
I agree with your deep thought idea @Mario_de_Vries
146 w
The climate should not be the subject of geopolitical or economical power-moves nor do these sort of statements fit the current zeitgeist. It's not in line with where the world needs to go. Besides, one could argue it's not in line with the Koran either. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-07-22/saudi-prince-abdulaziz-bin-salman-seeks-to-tame-oil-prices-opec-russia
33 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
146 w
Saudi will have to shift its economy into other sectors. A ban on oil imports will come as we can get our hydrocarbons from existing sources then.
•
146 w
How do they square that stance with the graphic shown here: https://twitter.com/WeDontHaveTime/status/1417516699449012231/photo/1 ?
147 w
Through Plastic Soup Foundation: Much of the plastic sold in the Netherlands originate from Chemelot, the largest industrial complex in the country. According to the company, sustainability is a high priority. For example, since last year, the company has been participating in Operation Clean Sweep, a worldwide program to eliminate plastic granules and litter from the environment. So from raw material suppliers to products, transporters, and recyclers. That all sounds wonderful, but meanwhile, last year, Chemelot applied for and received a permit to discharge residual waste streams into the Maas for seven years. The permit application acknowledges that (in addition to numerous other substances) these residual streams also contain 468 μg/l of polymers (microplastics). This amounts to a discharge of at least 14,040 kg per year of minuscule particles of plastic. These particles have been floating around in an industrial water treatment plant where they have come into direct contact with dangerous chemicals and can absorb them. Moreover, it is recognized that the effect of these polymers on the ecology in surface water and on drinking water production from the Maas is not yet sufficiently clear: “(Micro and Nanoplastics) hardly break down in the environment and are often poorly to very poorly water-soluble. The generic policy for this group of substances is aimed at prevention… Due to their physical characteristics, microplastics can negatively influence specific functions in aquatic organisms, such as respiration, movement, or food intake. Furthermore, they can have toxic effects, especially through additives present in microplastics or through chemicals that are adsorbed by microplastics in the (aquatic) environment,” according to the permit. Therefore, Chemelot is required to investigate these effects. However, they do not have to return with a report until January 2024. “So for the coming 2.5 years, the chemical industrial complex may continue to discharge plastic compounds into our (drinking) water undisturbed, with strong suspicions about their harmfulness to humans and the environment. That is the world upside down,” says Maria Westerbos, director of Plastic Soup Foundation. That is why Plastic Soup Foundation is making an urgent request to Chemelot to respond to this statement about the dumping and is also taking exploratory steps to see what can be done about it.
99 more agrees trigger social media ads
Pinned by We Don't Have Time
•
145 w
Thanks for your reaction. We understand your concerns. You can read our response here: https://www.chemelot.nl/nieuws/reactie-chemelot-artikel-plastic-soup-foundation In the attached magazine you can read from page 6 onwards an extensive article that you may find interesting as well: https://bit.ly/2V8LvRg
•
•
•
145 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your Climate Warning to level 2! We have reached out to Chemelot and asked for a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Sarah We Don't Have Time
•
145 w
Brilliant! Thanks Sarah! 💚
•
•
147 w
It's insane that they can wait until 2024....
148 w
I still hear every now and then that certain measures to tackle climate change are considered too expensive. I suddenly got curious about the following: What would be the monthly insurance premium I would have to pay as an individual to insure myself against human extinction? I think it would be really cool if big insurance companies such as you AXA would give a quotation on that. The amount you come up with would then serve as a benchmark for the G20 (20 biggest economies) to spend a certain percentage globally on behalf of every human individual for preventing exactly that (by limiting climate change and restoring eco-systems etc). We basically put a value on human life on earth, which could serve as an extra motivation for politicians and captains of industry to really use this momentum to write history!
118 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
•
136 w
Dear Mario de Vries Thank you for getting your climate idea to level 2! We have reached out to AXA and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
•
146 w
Ha ha! Great question. Makes you think🤔
•
147 w
This is a very interesting idea!
148 w
I had an idea the other day. What would be the monthly insurance premium I would have to pay as an individual to insure myself against human extinction? I think it would be really cool if big insurance companies such as AXA or Allianz would give a quotation on that. That amount would then serve as a benchmark to spend a certain percentage globally on behalf of every human for preventing exactly that (by limiting climate change and restoring eco-systems etc). Let's get their attention: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mario-d-3759679_insurance-lifeassurance-environment-activity-6819297739537436672-E4CD
•
•
•
148 w
Great idea! Indeed if you target Allianz as an idea.. they may respond to us all their opinion which may be worth to us all
•
148 w
Just did! Thanks for your support Patrick!
•
•
•
148 w
Love this. You should post it as an idea and send it to Allianz. The we don't have time team will help you reach them for a response.
188 w
Is everyone ready for the launch of #jointhecountdown today? Live on YouTube this morning/afternoon (wherever you are)! https://youtu.be/osy5qtx9R4M
•
•
•
188 w
I am looking forward to participate. We are also going to broadcast a special TedX from Glasgow on WeDontHaveTime at 18:30 CEST
Write or agree to climate reviews to make businesses and world leaders act. It’s easy and it works.
Certified accounts actively looking for your opinion on their climate impact.
One tree is planted for every climate review written to an organization that is Open for Climate Dialogue™.
•
•
55 w
They should give priority to clean energies
•
55 w
Fossil fuels need to be phased out and I believe SAS and other airlines are starting small with biofuel
•
55 w
Fossil fuels should be stopped and its deep roots uprooted. It shouldn't be tolerated