3 ms·

Often companies with good ESG scores optimize for having good scores. Its like studying to the test and they may have particularly poor results outside of the t

Often companies with good ESG scores optimize for having good scores. Its like studying to the test and they may have particularly poor results outside of the test that they have studied for. Also, ESG is political and like all things that involve politics, many things that may be good for the score may be bad for the environment. Easiest example to see is in energy with things like nuclear power, and 'biomass' and coal.

water9 3y ago
Nuclear power if done safely is a much better alternative than say windmills which require extensive mining to make and kill thousands of birds a year.
- maigret 3y ago
  You’ll hate cats then https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-killing-fields-for-birds/ https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-k...
  - genericone 3y ago
    You'll hate statistics even more: https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/02/03/170851048/do-we-really-know-that-cats-kill-by-the-billions-not-so-fast https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/02/03/170851048/do-we...
    - magicalist 3y ago
      That's not statistics, though? That's "we think there are fewer ownerless cats in the world than the authors do". > We don't quarrel with the conclusion that the impact is big, but the numbers are informed guesswork. Meanwhile the author outright says they're writing this opinion piece because they don't want to see cats banned as pets or people going out and killing a bunch of cats.
  - polski-g 3y ago
    Cats kill 2.4b birds a year? Buildings kill 600m? These numbers are completely unbelievable. Were the made up in a left-wing think tank staffed entirely by birds?
brickteacup 3y ago
something something when a metric becomes a target it ceases to be a good metric
robocat 3y ago
A good description would be “over-fitting”.
- nomel 3y ago
  I'm not sure that fits, since it might imply it's not intentional. I think these companies are simply, explicitly, optimizing directly for ESG, for maximum gain, without regards to the "spirit" of ESG. They're rational actors. Why wouldn't they? Just like with taxes, it would be silly to not use the loopholes.
barfingclouds 3y ago
Nuclear energy is clean energy

water9 3y ago

Nuclear power if done safely is a much better alternative than say windmills which require extensive mining to make and kill thousands of birds a year.

maigret 3y ago
You’ll hate cats then https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-killing-fields-for-birds/ https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-k...
- genericone 3y ago
  You'll hate statistics even more: https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/02/03/170851048/do-we-really-know-that-cats-kill-by-the-billions-not-so-fast https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/02/03/170851048/do-we...
  - magicalist 3y ago
    That's not statistics, though? That's "we think there are fewer ownerless cats in the world than the authors do". > We don't quarrel with the conclusion that the impact is big, but the numbers are informed guesswork. Meanwhile the author outright says they're writing this opinion piece because they don't want to see cats banned as pets or people going out and killing a bunch of cats.
- polski-g 3y ago
  Cats kill 2.4b birds a year? Buildings kill 600m? These numbers are completely unbelievable. Were the made up in a left-wing think tank staffed entirely by birds?

brickteacup 3y ago

something something when a metric becomes a target it ceases to be a good metric

robocat 3y ago

A good description would be “over-fitting”.

nomel 3y ago
I'm not sure that fits, since it might imply it's not intentional. I think these companies are simply, explicitly, optimizing directly for ESG, for maximum gain, without regards to the "spirit" of ESG. They're rational actors. Why wouldn't they? Just like with taxes, it would be silly to not use the loopholes.

barfingclouds 3y ago

Nuclear energy is clean energy