The typical problem for for environmental commentator is how can I stop sounding like a cynical kill-joy hell-bent on making people live uncomfortable lives growing potatoes?

I love this juxta-position.  It's something that makes thinking about the environment and taking action on it that bit more interesting.  I was reading up on some of the week's environmental news and I can across this report on the Today programme.  Shell Springboard grants money to organisations "who submit the most compelling plans for a product or service which helps combat climate change." (from shellspringboard.org).

The Pessimist Rises... 

No doubt any British reader will also be aware of the recent news of Shell's triumphant profit of more than £13.9bn.  Well I like a bit of maths.  The £13.9bn makes £38m per day, £1.5m per hour and about £26,000 per minute.  So £40,000 is just over 1.5 minutes of work.  Apparently they gave 8 awards in 2006.  Somehow, I feel Shell could be a little more generous.

The Optimist Balances...

Let's put on the optimist's hat though.  Speaking from experience, £40,000 is a lot of money and for a small business can make a large difference.  And Shell doesn't have to give the money out.  I like to think that it's better to do something than nothing.

Back...

Sure, they do something.  Could they do a lot?  Could Shell afford 20 minutes of profit instead of up to 10?

And forth...

But! No-one and no company is perfect - the best logic-cracker of them all.

Confused? 

The really interesting dilemma for the budding "green" business is whether to take the money?

View and Add Comments