5 ms·
So are they just cutting ties with suppliers that are actively sawing down rainforests? How about suppliers that have already destroyed huge swathes of it but a
by SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
So are they just cutting ties with suppliers that are actively sawing down rainforests? How about suppliers that have already destroyed huge swathes of it but aren't currently expanding their plantations, surely they don't deserve Mondelez's business if this isn't just a PR stunt?
- matt_morgan 8y agoIf you want it to keep going, support Greenpeace.
- raverbashing 8y agoOh the "nuclear power is bad let's keep using non-renewable fuels" greenpeace? No, thanks
- dewey 8y agoI’d say the lesser evil of these two is the one that can be switched off faster and doesn’t any extremely long lasting side effects even if it’s less green “right now”. There are various alternatives to nuclear power that are getting better quickly and will get only more popular as fossil fuels get less attractive.
- saalweachter 8y agoSo you're saying atmospheric CO2 is not an extremely long-lasting side effect?
- cagenut 8y agothe effects of a +2C climate will wildly, massively, unspeakably eclipse that of a hundred chernobyls. we are on course for at least a +4C world.
- reaperducer 8y agoIs Greenpeace still using bunker oil to power its ship, and dumping garbage and human waste at sea, or is that all fixed now? (Fueling a ship with bunker oil is only slightly less bad to the environment than shoveling baby koalas into the furnace.)