Recently, one of the most hot-debated topics is global warming and the carbon-neutral policies that a number of multinational companies have put in place to contain this phenomenon.
We discussed this with Davide Buccheri, a capital markets expert, with experience in renewable energy investments.
“Going carbon neutral is a great idea - if we really want to die very badly. Anyone with some understanding of the issue knows this really well. The problem is that most people don’t understand what global warming actually is and therefore accept and praise these companies, without paying too much attention to them.”
“In simple terms” Buccheri explains “global warming is caused by an imbalance between the energy Earth absorbs from the sun and that which it radiates back to space. As Earth doesn’t radiate sufficient energy now, temperatures go up. It’s a basic principle of physics.”
“What has happened since the start of the industrial revolution is that carbon particles in the atmosphere increased from 280 to 400 parts. The issue is that carbon is not the only thing we emit when producing energy. There are also a lot of aerosols and sulphites. These have a tendency to cool the atmosphere.”
“The difference between carbon and aerosols is that the former is very stable, whereas the latter aren’t and tend to get expelled from the atmosphere in a matter of weeks. This means that if we all went carbon neutral today, we’d still have 400 parts of carbon, but no more aerosols. The net result would be an increase in global warming - almost double the current amount.”
Davide Buccheri then concludes with a word of advice: “if you want to help the environment, you need to convince governments to invest more in renewable energy. Reducing CO2 emissions can be only useful in the short term and even detrimental in the long run. That is, unless some proper policies to reabsorb carbon from the atmosphere are put in place.