Coca-Cola’s Bizarre Dichotomy

co2-ng-tanker1As is noted at NoCapAndTrade.com, Coca-Cola is a target of a boycott against companies who support cap and trade legislation, or the proposed Copenhagen climate treaty (which is designed to implement global cap and trade regulations of carbon dioxide). The fact that they would support regulating carbon dioxide emissions is in itself quite bizarre, since one of the main ingredients of their primary products is carbon dioxide and they are one of the world’s top users of the gas. Every time a can or bottle of Coke is opened, CO2 gets released into the atmosphere. Dr. Roy Spencer of NASA estimates that Coca-Cola products release 4,000 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every day. It gets stranger.

In their effort to reduce their “carbon footprint,” they’ve replaced their HFC-based refrigeration units with units that use CO2-based refrigerants. According to Coca-Cola, “Carbon dioxide, a natural refrigerant that is HFC-free, has less direct climate impact and improves energy efficiency under typical operating conditions.” They point to a venture called, “Refrigerants, Naturally!” which is a global initiative of companies committed to combating climate change by substituting flourinated gasses with “natural refrigerants.” Refrigerants like carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons, the most vilified gasses on earth for their supposed greenhouse-amplifying effect. As it happens, flourine is an element and thus quite natural, albeit, toxic. The effort is supported by Grenpeace and the United Nations Environment Programme.

Has Coca-Cola made a Faustian bargain? Support for cap and trade in exchange for absolution of their own tremendous use of carbon dioxide? Or, is another motivation at work?

Carbon Sequestration, or Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a new “green” field of technology being developed to combat the supposed perils of global warming. An example of the concept is “clean coal technology.” When the coal is burned, instead of allowing carbon dioxide to escape up the smokestacks, it’s captured, liquefied and stored to later be injected into deep geological formations, like spent oil fields (or applied to industrial purposes). How does the CO2 get from the power plant to its final resting place underground? As it happens, there are only 4 shipping tankers in the world that are purpose-built for transporting carbon dioxide. Coca-Cola owns them. They also rely on the gas for the manufacture of their soda products. Is Coke planning to capture and transport CO2, only to release it back through its soft drinks? Could they also be gearing up to become a supplier of CO2-based refrigerants for “green” fridges and air conditioners?

Coke’s biggest rival soft drink maker, Pepsi Co. is also targeted by the NoCapAndTrade.com boycott for their support of cap and trade. Pepsi is, of course, another company that is heavily dependant on carbon dioxide. They are listed as a partner on the Refrigerants, Naturally website.

There’s much more to the economics and politics of cap and trade than meets the eye. Clearly, many companies are lining up in support of cap and trade because they are set up to profit from it. Coca-Cola, one of the world’s most CO2-dependent companies is also one of cap and trade’s biggest corporate boosters. It’s becoming clearer why. When something political doesn’t at first seem to make sence, always follow the money.

19 Responses to Coca-Cola’s Bizarre Dichotomy

  1. Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 18, 2009 at 10:25 pm #

    I don’t like the fact that there are a lot of companies that are hopping on the bandwagon for climate change legislation. But I think they are reacting mostly out of fear, and they have good reason to be afraid. Their very existance is at stake. I think we need to combat the AGW theory itself and any related legislation, not these companies. I am not for boycotts. I think the only people who get hurt by them are workers who end up getting laid off, or let go because of a loss of business. They don’t hurt the companies or the polititians that are persuing this nonsense.
    So I can’t support boycotts, they only hurt the little guy.

  2. BEEJAYM November 18, 2009 at 11:31 pm #

    Neil and Dan

    Your inputs would have much more authority, as they deserve, if you learned to use the spell checker on your computer. I agree,” climate change” is another of the emotional tags being used by so-called environmentalists to help attain their political agenda. Emotive language has no place in this discussion, put more scientific facts in front of the emotion. Who has spoken about the changes in the Sun and the relative position of the Globe (Earth) in relation to the changes to the Sun?

    Therein lies the explanation of global warming.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 19, 2009 at 7:47 am #

      Wut ar yu tokin abowt? Spel cheker?
      Really? Who cares? Nobody’s perfect. Although I get a little twisted out of shape when improper word usage is used, so I can’t be completely sore about you being nit picky. But really, as long as the point gets across, I don’t think anyone cares…. except for you. Besides spell checker is a pain in the neck! It’s always prompting you to change things like the names of people and/or places even when you have spelled them correctly. So I’m sorry. You’ll just have to get over it because I won’t use spell checker. I absolutely refuse to use it.
      Also, if you have been reading my posts for any length of time you would know that I have spoken about solar cycles, Earth’s relative position to the Sun, CFC’s, aerosols, volcanic activity, cosmic rays related to cloud formation, and even the position of our solar system in the spiral arms of the galaxy.
      I have also spoken about a lot of other things that I have forgotten about because they don’t matter to the AGW true believers out there. Their adherence to AGW theory is not based on science it is solely based on emotion. And I think the way to combat it is with an emotional argument. Otherwise you may never get through to them.
      Another thing, I never claimed to be an authority, or expert on any of this. What I write here is entirely my opinion and nothing more. So take it or leave it.

      • Lance November 20, 2009 at 12:04 am #

        Yea Neil, who cares about what anyone else has to say? You sir are a prime example of a hypocrite.

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 20, 2009 at 1:55 am #

          I’m sorry. What? Care to expand on that? For example, what am I a hypocrite about? I just don’t know what you’re talking about. Are you just a hit and run troller, or do you want to give us an opinion other than attacking me personally? What’s all this misdirected animosity??????

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 20, 2009 at 7:33 pm #

          Lance. I’m waiting.
          Oh, and “yea” is a “yay” sound so I thought you were cheering me at first. “Yeah” is the correct word for the usage you intended. It is a coloquialism for the word “yes”.

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 20, 2009 at 7:45 pm #

          Did you know that yea is a common MISPELLING of the word yeah? I find it ironic that you jump on me about giving BEEJAYM a hard time about using spell checker. And you don’t use it yourself. Wait! That would also make you a hypocrite! Welcome to the club!

          • Lance November 28, 2009 at 11:45 am #

            It seems to me that you have to make a smart ass comment about everyone elses comments because they dont agree with you. You seem to have a hard time letting people talk and debate without you getting in the middle like a 6 year old school boy fighting over the playground. Oh “yea”, and im a hit and run troller because i might come on here once a week and all you do is seem to piss people off so i have to throw in my two bits every now and then not every hour. i guess your right that does make my a hypocrite too. But im still going to point out the obvious about you :)

  3. CC26 November 19, 2009 at 8:43 am #

    There are a lot of companies and certain individuals (Gore) who stand to profit from cap and trade legislation. The people who will be hurt by it are average Americans. We will see our energy bills go through the roof and millions of jobs lost, all for misguided legislation that will do nothing for the environment. Please write your Representatives in Congress and voice opposition to cap and trade at http://tiny.cc/gdz37. This is legislation we can not afford!

  4. Matt P. November 19, 2009 at 6:24 pm #

    FOR GODS SAKE! Aren’t we forgetting the basic fact that CO2 does little (if anything) to increase the warming of our planet! Any climatologist, meteorologist, atmospheric scientist (people who actually know this stuff) will agree. All these rules, regulations, bills and coming taxes are based on LIES told by Gore and the rest of the wacko Greens. Read Neil’s posts about the hundreds of other ways we warm up other than CO2, I’m too angry to type anymore.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 21, 2009 at 2:13 pm #

      Thanks Matt. Tis’ true! CO2 can only adsorb a certain number of wavelengths in the infra-red rage of the electro-magnetic spectrum. Simply put, once those wavelengths are absorbed, that’s it, it will absorb no more, no matter how much more CO2 is added. I’m not a scientist, but I know this to be a scientific fact. But that doesn’t matter to someone who believes they are going to save the planet! If the IPCC came out with a report that said light was bad for your eyes, these people would pluck out their eyeballs!
      They are like the Japanese people from Okanawa towards the end of WWII. They jumped off the cliffs commiting suicide because they believed the Americans that were invading were monsters that were going to kill the men, rape the women, and eat their babies.
      That is the power of belief! They saw no evidence of the things they were told, yet they killed themselves anyway. That is what we are fighting against. And all the scientific facts in the world will not sway their belief. I used to think it would, but I have learned a lot since then.

      • Neil F. AGWD/BSD November 21, 2009 at 11:10 pm #

        Sorry, did I say Okanawa? That was actually Saipan where they jumped off the cliffs. WWII history is not my strong suit, appearantly.

  5. paul wenum November 19, 2009 at 11:32 pm #

    I agree, go with the flow. Finger in the wind and profits will follow. Is it right? No, it is reality. You see an opportunity, you take the short term profits as long as it exists. It’s the old saying, “Ride the horse until it it dies.” Unfortunately, numerous companies run with this philosophy. In the meantime, “Fat Albert” reaps the rewards. Interesting isn’t it?

  6. Lee Welter, SACRAMENTO CA November 22, 2009 at 5:00 pm #

    BEEJAYM says: says “Emotive language has no place in this discussion.” But since we can’t eliminate it, let’s use it. Forget the “AGW” acronym: I favor calling them the Cult of Anthropogenic Climate Alteration (CACA). Step in it but wipe your feet before joining our discussion.

  7. Paul Wenum November 24, 2009 at 2:28 am #

    My feet are clean. Last time I checked.

  8. Rob N. Hood November 28, 2009 at 10:33 am #

    So Paul, you finally write a decent post, above. But apparently you believe only those on the right can and should profit from our broken system of capitalism…?

  9. Rob N. Hood November 29, 2009 at 9:28 am #

    Hello… Can’t or won’t answer the question?

  10. paul wenum November 30, 2009 at 12:57 am #

    Robby Boy, As posted before, if you work hard legally, it will come, Scam the system such as Global warming and Al Gore, Soros, GE etc, then we have a problem. I believe in telling the truth no matter how hard it hurts to hear. You love to hear what “you want to hear.” There is a difference.!!!!

  11. Rob N. Hood December 5, 2009 at 2:53 pm #

    Didn’t answer the question…

Leave a Reply

A project of Minnesota Majority