especially for our planet—but there's tons of skepticism. Some, for instance, find it a case of hypocrisy while others argue it'll be a true struggle to spend such an outsized amount of cash effectively.
Such concerns aren't surprising. Until his announcement, Bezos hasn’t demonstrated to be particularly climate-sensitive or showing signs of excellent corporate citizenship with Amazon. On the contrary, Amazon is heavily criticized for paying not enough taxes despite record profits, for its huge carbon footprint (44,4 million metric plenty of CO2 in 2018) and for threatening to fireside employees who were publicly calling for stronger climate actions.
No matter how true such criticism is, the sensible facts are that Bezos has reserved $10 billion which is often tons of cash which will make a big difference within the fight against global climate change. The forward-looking question, then, is what Bezos should spend this money on. I don’t mean which particular quite projects or green technologies Bezos should invest in. Others have given such suggestions and if Bezos is trying to find inspiration, he should check out Project Drawdown for extra suggestions.
What I mean is who to offer this money to form the most important impact; to which type of person or organization. I can consider four options: 1) provides it to at least one or more existing organizations or projects focused on reducing global climate change, 2) starting his own organization and invest largely especially projects or technologies, 3) spend it on political campaigns for pro-climate candidates and 4) provides it back to where it came from Amazon. Let’s evaluate these options.
Option 1: Invest in existing climate projects or organizations
The first thing Bezos can do is give his money to existing projects or organizations which, in a method or the opposite, fight global climate change. As nicely explained by Robinson Meyer of The Atlantic, though, there are substantial problems with this. On the one hand, suddenly adding $10 billion to the pro-climate landscape can seriously disturb it. for many organizations $10 billion is just far an excessive amount of and compared to the cash invested now, such an outsized amount can seriously disrupt the emerging ecosystem of projects and organizations. On the opposite hand, if invested in, e.g., large infrastructural or energy projects, $10 billion won't be enough to fund even one among them properly, leaving the impact quite limited.
Option 2: Start his own green-tech company
Bezos could also start his own pro-climate venture and invest largely in one or more green technologies to form them big. this feature, though, has substantial disadvantages too. just like the first option, it can seriously disturb the present landscape of projects and organizations. Furthermore, green-tech isn’t particularly Bezos’s core expertise, making it faraway from evident that he could build a successful green-tech company. Also, he still has this other company, posing for his attention: Amazon. One multi-billion-dollar company is perhaps enough for one person to steer.
Option 3: Spend it on politics
A third thing Bezos could spend his money on is political campaigns for pro-climate politicians—running for president or for other key positions. during this way, instead of spending the cash directly on climate saving actions, Bezos would influence who is responsible and thereby make a way bigger and longer-lasting impact—as also Meyer acknowledged within the Atlantic. While perhaps appealing, it's probably not a really likely option. So far, Bezos has largely avoided taking sides in politics and his thus far only major contribution to a political campaign has been $10 million to “With Honor Fund” supporting military veterans running for Congress. While not impossible, it seems unlikely he would suddenly become a lively promoter of pro-climate politicians.
Option 4: provides it back to Amazon
The last option would be that Bezos gives him a refund to Amazon. Against this feature, one could argue that Amazon doesn’t need much money. After all, it's one among the most important tech companies within the world, with big pockets and if there's any company that would spare the cash it's Amazon. Maybe. But compared to Apple’s $22.3 billion profit in Q4 2019, Amazon’s $3.3 billion isn't that spectacular (both having roughly equivalent revenue of around $90 billion).
But aside from that, there are more compelling reasons why giving the $10 billion back to Amazon is that the best option:
It is where the cash came from within the first place. And, as long as Amazon isn’t particularly doing well in terms of its climate impact, the cash could alright be wont to drastically fix Amazon’s climate problems.
Investing it back in Amazon doesn’t have the disruptive effect that the primary two options have. $10 billion is even much for Amazon. But it's a workable amount of cash given the size of the corporate. a corporation of that scale can effectively spend that quantity of cash.
Making an outsized, long-lasting and systematic positive impact requires an outsized world organization. Amazon is such an organization—and market leader. By spending the cash to enhance Amazon’s primary processes and everything around it, both the direct effect and therefore the trickle-down effect on other players within the sector are often huge.
Spending the $10 billion on Amazon may be a clear kickstart for raising its climate aspirations. So far, Amazon’s ambition is to be climate neutral in 2040. that's 20 long years and not half as ambitious as Microsoft’s recently announced goal to be carbon negative in 2030.
So, here may be a suggestion for Jeff Bezos if he's really serious about what he said on Instagram (“climate change is that the biggest threat to our planet”) and needs to try to something about it: give them $10 billion back to Amazon and use it to radically improve the corporate and ensure Amazon is carbon neutral latest by 2030. At an equivalent time, restructure the corporate so that proper tax is paid which will float to the govt. And, alongside, the thought of option 3, spend another $10 billion on promoting the foremost pro-climate candidates running for Congress and president.
Follow Us