Bold Business Logo

Reality Check: The Green Energy Movement Is Causing More Harm Than Good

Throughout the world, nations have been progressively adopting green initiatives in an effort to promote resource sustainability. Greenhouse gas emissions have significantly increased over the last century, and climate change threatens global ecosystems. Scarcity of water and rare earth minerals pose additional threats. Without question, environmentally conscious policies are needed to address these threats, and sooner rather than later. But that doesn’t mean countries should dive in blindly into green policies without due consideration. Challenges of going green abound, as evidenced by a number of current green energy failures. Unless a more realistic approach is considered, such policies will impose much greater costs than benefits.

The climate and resource dilemmas present today didn’t develop overnight. They have gradually developed over many decades. Green movement enthusiasts are naturally quick to point out that these issues are on an accelerated trajectory. But this doesn’t prove that adopting overly aggressive green policies provides a reasonable solution. Where such approaches have been pursued, the outcomes have been dismal. This not only includes instances of green energy failures but likewise devastating situations that are threatening entire societies. The challenges of going green are real, and it’s time we took a more long-term perspective in green policy initiatives.

Sri Lanka – A Case of Too Green, Too Fast

Not all issues with green initiatives involve green energy failures. Sri Lanka is a great case in point. In April of 2021, the nation’s prime minister implemented a total and complete ban on chemical fertilizer. Touted as an effort to be responsible in environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) issues, leaders believed it was positive. But without a backup plan to support the 2 million farmers in the country, the challenges of going green soon appeared. Today, Sri Lanka is in political upheaval, and a third of the nation’s farms are dormant. Despite its near perfect ESG score of 98, it is unclear how the country and its people will survive.

(Read more about ESG’s in this Bold explainer!)

When the Sri Lankan fertilizer ban went into effect, roughly 90% of all farms used chemical fertilizer. As a result, Sri Lanka has suffered an 85% export reduction in crops. More specifically, rice production has fallen 20% with its price increasing 50% in value. Once self-sufficient in producing this grain, the country now imports $450 million of rice. And the country’s tea exports, which previously totaled $1.3 billion, paid for more than 70% of Sri Lanka’s imports. That is no longer the case as tea production has also declined substantially. Today, over 500,000 additional Sri Lankans have fallen into poverty as food, fuel, and transportation costs have soared. Challenges of going green always exist, but as Sri Lanka shows, going green too fast dramatically intensifies the problems.

Europe’s Renewable Energy Dilemma

Many of the challenges of going green suffered by countries today relate to green energy failures. At the current time, several countries are experiencing such struggles based on green energy policies they’ve pursued. Many nations have purposefully invested heavily in renewable energies like wind, solar and hydroelectric. These efforts are highly valuable, offering opportunities to create a more sustainable and diversified energy portfolio. But here again, green policies have pursued renewable energy options too aggressively at the expense of other energy sources. Specifically, many nations throughout Europe have sacrificed coal and nuclear energy resources in the process. This has placed them in a vicarious situation today as a result.

A bunch of solar panels working on their tan
One of the biggest challenges of going green is economic collapse… so be careful of that.

In recent months, Russia has cut natural gas supplies to several European nations. This has caused significant increases in energy prices as a result and created an energy supply crisis. In Germany, which previously operated 18 nuclear plants providing a third of its electricity, is now suffering greatly. The country only has three such plants today and plans to close them in the future in favor of renewables. France, which has limited coal supplies, previously relied on nuclear power for 70% of its electric needs. And the UK, which is not reliant on Russia, is continuing to subsidize green energy initiatives that’s escalating energy prices. Green energy failures are everywhere, but few are acknowledging them.

The Truth About Green Energy

The problem is that the challenges of going green are being underestimated by nations throughout the world. Green energy failures are not only occurring in Europe but in Australia and the US as well. But despite pursuing renewable energy and green initiatives, policies change when push comes to shove. When electricity needs rise, countries will do whatever they must to meet their energy needs. That is why Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Poland have all increased coal use in recent months. It’s also why coal continues to be the largest source of electricity generation in the world. Green energy failures force nations to fall back on reliable, cost-effective energy resources. And these challenges of going green won’t disappear overnight.

In terms of green energy failures, renewable sources have inherent problems that limit their potential. Intermittency and inconsistency are one of the most problematic challenges of going green. This is particularly true for wind and solar energy production. In addition, generation of renewable energy requires high-cost resources such as concrete, copper, and steel. This is why subsidies are usually required and why energy prices for renewable are usually high. Then, there is an ever-constrained access to available land resources for generating renewable energy. This is not to say renewable and sustainable energy shouldn’t be pursued. But green energy failures are prevalent, and reliance on these alone is simply not practical.

Idealism Must Yield to Realism

Green initiatives are essential when it comes to protecting the environment and securing resources for the future. But at the same time, current challenges of going green are too abundant to simply ignore. That means a more gradual and methodical approach is essential. It also means investing in natural gas, coal and nuclear energy is essential to meet global energy demands. And it means suddenly banning non-ESG practices completely is dangerous. By taking this approach, green energy failures and human suffering will become an ever-increasing norm. Instead, a more realistic strategy is needed in order to move in a direction that’s safer and more practical. Green is good, but too much green too quickly is a recipe for disaster.

 

Want to control your cost efficiency and protect your bottom line? Bold Business can help.

How Elon Musk Rewrote the CEO Compensation Playbook

Back in 2018, Tesla appeared to be in trouble. Elon Musk was struggling to get production of the more affordable Model 3 up to projections. Investors speculated other heavyweights in the automobile industry would squash the company in a matter of years. But amidst all of this, Musk convinced Tesla’s board of directors to consider a new type of CEO compensation package for himself. He would agree to stay at the helm for another decade if they would provide performance pay for CEO leadership. No salary, simply stocks and options. In other words, if Tesla failed, then so would Musk.

Fast forward to 2022, the predictions of 2018 for Tesla seem almost laughable. In less than four years, the company’s worth has increased from $59 billion to nearly a trillion dollars. In the process, Musk’s net worth has exceeded $3 billion with CEO compensation earnings last year worth $6.7 billion. What Musk has accomplished was not believed to be possible. But by insisting on performance pay for CEO leadership, Musk had tremendous incentives to excel. This and his willingness to explore paths less traveled has led to great success. And as a result, many companies are following suit, hoping they can reduplicate what Tesla has been able to achieve.

(Musk routinely employs a prune-and-grow strategy in business–read this Bold story to learn more!)

“There’s a lot of companies out there that saw [Tesla’s] award and its structure. They think it’s a good way to incentivize performance.” – Brian Johnson, executive director with ISS Corporate Solutions

Recent Trends in CEO Compensation Plans

In recent surveys, it’s evident that Musk’s situation at Tesla has affected CEO compensation strategies. Year over year, CEOs earned 31% more than they did previously. looking back several years, earning figures for CEOs have effectively tripled for the top companies in the country. And it’s not simply for major firms like Amazon, Microsoft, and Alphabet. In 2021, Jeff Green of Trade Desk received $835 million in performance pay for CEO responsibilities. Peter Kern of Expedia received $296 million. And Sue Nobi, the only female CEO in the top 20 CEO earners, reported $284 million in income. These are sizable increased that highlight how CEO compensation trends are changing.

Among the top 10 companies in the U.S., the average CEO compensation exceeded $330 million. Musk has a lot to do with these trends. Because CEO earnings must be reported by public companies, other firms are well aware of the performance pay for CEO leadership that Musk has received. At the same time, they are also aware of the massive increase in valuation that has occurred simultaneously for Tesla. Seeing the win-win scenario as a means excel within their own markets, companies are embracing performance pay for CEO guidance. An incentive-based package consisting of stocks and options aligns CEO compensation with firm success. The concept is simply, but it took Musk to prove to them its value.

“When the market performs as well as it did in 2021—the S&P 500 rose 26.9 percent—and considering that CEO pay is incentive based, it’s not surprising. This year, if the S&P 500 continues to fall, you would expect to see CEO compensation come down.” – Michael Faulkender, Professor of Finance, University of Maryland’s School of Business

What Goes Up Can Also Come Down

Of course, not every company is going to follow in Tesla’s footsteps when it comes to company valuations. Not all companies will have an in-vogue product like electric cars. This will be especially true for many companies in 2022 with a drop in the market. As share prices decline for a firm, then stocks are less valuable. As a result, CEO compensation designed solely on stocks and options like Musk’s will take a hit. But this is the essence of performance pay for CEO packages. CEOs most willing to bet on themselves will be the ones who have the greatest potential to do well. But they are also the ones who will be taking the most risk. It might come as little surprise that Musk was willing to take this leap of faith. But the question is whether all CEOs will do the same.

An issue of the Financial Times
Sure, CEO compensation can be a lot, but those who follow Musk’s example are getting paid contingent upon their success.

Unlike Musk, few companies have CEO compensation packages that award solely stocks and options to its leadership. Instead, base salaries are usually guaranteed while stock incentives comprise the rest of the deal. Regardless, stocks and options are progressively making up larger portions of CEO’s earnings. Companies want results, and they want to link performance pay for CEO activities to company share values. By having more skin in the game, their level of commitment and dedication will certainly rise. And if it doesn’t, then they have as much to lose as the firm’s shareholders. It’s this simple concept that prevented most from pushing back against outlandish CEO compensation packages like Musk’s.

“As a percentage of the value of the company, CEO compensation hasn’t risen all that much although the absolute dollar amount has.” – Michael Faulkender

Additional Benefits for CEO Performance Pay

While performance pay for CEO leadership aligns company and executive incentives, there are other advantages. From the CEO’s perspective, compensation in stocks and options can significantly reduce tax burdens. Instead of a salary subject to income tax, stocks are only taxed when sold. And instead of selling stock and paying capital gains tax, stocks can be used as collateral for loans. This allows CEOs like Musk to pay debt interest in low single digits instead of double-digit taxes. This is yet another reason why many top leaders welcome these new trends in CEO compensation.

From the firm’s point of view, CEO compensation deals can also require that a number of objectives be met. Instead of simply targeting company valuation amounts, other requirements can be included in performance pay for CEO leadership. For example, Musk not only had to attain a company valuation of $650 billion for Tesla. He also had to meet sales objectives and operational profit targets. Thus, if done well, incentive-based compensation for CEO performance is quite attractive from everyone’s perspective. And interestingly, we have Musk to thank for it.

 

Want to control your cost efficiency and protect your bottom line? Bold Business can help.

Medical Tourism In Action: A Floating Abortion Clinic

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, changes are rapidly evolving. Several states, some that had already passed laws opposing abortion, are changing policies. Others are making access to abortion easier through legislation. Regardless of which side of the issue one falls, it’s evident that the Court’s ruling is having major effects. And one of the most noted ones involves medical tourism for abortion. While this was an expected development as word leaked of the Court’s opinion, the magnitude is impressive. And some medical tourism ideas are quite creative and inventive.

(Read more about the concept of medical tourism in this Bold deep-dive!)

One of the most interesting ideas regarding medical tourism for abortion involves federal waters in the Gulf. Once outside immediate state coastal waters, ships could potentially serve as floating clinics outside a state’s legal domain. Such enterprises would allow easier access to abortion for those in some of the most restrictive states. While there’s more to it than simply hopping on boat, the idea is an intriguing one. And it only one among many that are exploring various ways that medical tourism for abortion might be used.

“We have to create options and be thoughtful and creative to help people in restrictive states get the health care they deserve.” – Dr. Meg Autry, Board-certified Obstetrician/Gynecologist, UCSF/Mount Zion Women’s Health Center

Launching the PRROWESS

Advocacy groups for women’s rights and choice have become increasingly vocal in recent weeks. But for Dr. Meg Autry, she has been a longtime supporter of these issues throughout her career. As an experienced obstetrician at the University of California in San Francisco, she has promoted women’s health for years. And now, she plans to expand her efforts through her nonprofit known as Protecting Reproductive Rights of Women Endangered by State Statutes (PRROWESS) group. PROWESS will be the sponsoring organization for a floating ship in the Gulf of Mexico offering medical tourism for abortion.  The mission is to offer access to abortion to women in Southern states that may otherwise lack such services.

PRROWESS plans to maintain a distance of 9 nautical miles offshore in an effort to function beyond state jurisdictions. States like Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi have already banned abortions after 6 weeks gestation or so. However, Dr. Autry hopes to provide access to abortion as late as 14 weeks in her offshore clinics. Accessing the Gulf waters may be easier for women in these states when compared traveling to other states or regions. Therefore, PRROWESS could offer a creative opportunity for medical tourism for abortion in these states.

“…In Texas, we have a lot of medical tourism or medical commerce. And we have had that for years. And so going to pharmacies or even to a dentist or doctor in a Mexican border city is really very common.” – Dianne Solis, Press Reporter covering immigration topics, Dallas Morning News

Alternatives for Medical Tourism for Abortion

For women in Texas and adjacent states, access to abortion via a floating clinic might be feasible. But that is not the case in other regions of the country. Several states, such as Idaho, have passed restrictive abortion laws as well. In these instances, women are turning to adjacent states that offer such services as possible alternatives. New Jersey, for example, is actively recruiting patients from other states looking for medical tourism for abortion options. In fact, they are even offering legal protections in such instances. Others are traveling across the border to Mexico for abortion medications and services. Recent reports actually suggest that medical tourism for abortion has risen 10-fold in recent weeks.

The inside of an operating room
Medical tourism means that those without easy access to abortion are going to shop around to where they can get it.

Notably, these are alternative options for the access to abortion for some women. But that doesn’t mean it’s as simple as traveling to another state or taking a medical cruise. Some states have included what is known as “bounty hunter” clauses in their abortion legislation. These clauses empower regular citizens to identify someone aiding and abetting abortion services, even those helping someone leave the state. In fact, some laws even allow these same citizens to file lawsuits against these accomplices in court. This is why states like New Jersey are trying to boost medical tourism for abortion by offering legal protection. But whether such protections will hold up remains unclear.

“…We recognize that decisions [about abortion] involving health and families are deeply personal and made with thoughtful consideration. We are making this decision so our teammates can access the same healthcare options, regardless of where they live, and choose what is best for them.” – Lauren Hobart, CEO of Dick’s Sporting Goods

Business Support for Medical Tourism

While the political and legal landscape is still evolving, it is evident that many businesses are supporting medical tourism. Understanding the issue surrounding access to abortion is a personal one, corporations aren’t necessarily taking a position. Instead, many are simply ensuring their employees receive the support they need in getting quality healthcare services. In some cases, this includes access to abortion services when travel is required. Whether looking to travel to a nearby state or a floating clinic in the Gulf, many businesses are stepping up.

In total, more than 50 corporations have offered support, financial and otherwise, for medical tourism for abortion. From Airbnb to Zillow, policy statements have been made committing help those in need have access to abortion services. For Dick’s Sporting Goods, they have promised $4,000 to cover travel expenses to the nearest location of these services. Amazon similarly will provide the same amount for non-life-threatening medical care. Disney is another company who has also promised to make sure their staff receives affordable, safe and comprehensive care. Based on this, it’s clear that medical tourism for abortion will likely thrive in the coming months.

The Start of Something Bigger?

Prior to the pandemic, telehealth was touted as a new technology to enhance healthcare access and to lower costs. But it wasn’t until lockdowns and quarantines forced the industry’s hand that telehealth was more fully embraced. This raises the question as to whether Roe v. Wade might represent a similar catalyst for state-to-state medical tourism. If advantages of medical tourism for abortion becomes evident, consumers might start exploring healthcare options further. Access to abortion may therefore usher in greater access to other services at lower costs. Of course, it’s too early to tell, but the possibilities are intriguing. For now, creativity lies within those exploring floating ships and protective legislation. But in the future, innovation in medical tourism between states might explore much broader opportunities.

 

Want to control your cost efficiency and protect your bottom line? Bold Business can help.

How can we help?

Bold Business
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.