Apparently corporations will be first against the wall when the revolution comes. At least so we gather from a piece in Bloomberg that asks “As Companies Abandon Climate Pledges, Is There a Silver Lining?” and answers yes, comrades: “Coca-Cola, BP, HSBC and countless others are dropping environmental goals, highlighting the inadequacy of voluntary action”. Others might of course say that companies blithely made pledges of dramatic action later when talk was cheap and it seemed this green energy transition the kids were going on about was a cool easy marvellous thing. But with objects in calendar closer than they appear, it was suddenly necessary to deliver concretely and they couldn’t because (all together now) there is no such transition because it defies the laws of physics and economics. And which point, who doesn’t want Leviathan blundering in?

The article concedes that the companies tried. It opens by profiling a guy who:

“recently spent five years at Hennes & Mauritz AB trying to cut emissions from the Swedish fashion giant’s vast supply chain, from Cambodian sewing lines to Vietnamese dye houses.”

And it would be hard to argue that neither the firm nor the guy, Peter Ford, were sincere. Fashion isn’t exactly a bastion of reaction. And:

“to its credit, H&M invested about $200 million a year in these efforts and recently reported a 24% cut in its supply chain emissions. But Ford isn’t celebrating. ‘As an industry, it’s not working out yet,’ he says bluntly. Apparel emissions are still growing – and could expand an additional 30% this decade, according to McKinsey & Co.”

OK, fashion isn’t necessarily a bastion of sustained focus, self-denial and sincerity either. But the big point is that:

“From airlines to banks to retailers, the story is the same: Over the past few decades, more than 4,000 companies have made big climate pledges, but results are scant, and emissions continue to rise. Worse, we’re now seeing a retreat.”

We suppose the author, an “Investigative Reporter”, investigated that the bubbles in Coke and Pepsi are CO2. But it gets worse, because across a vast range of industries with varying degrees of genuine commitment versus greenwashing PR, it’s simply turning out that you can’t do what the zealots said you could the way they said you could or at all.

For instance “Walmart Inc. admits it’s behind on its climate targets, while FedEx Corp. says it will likely miss its goal to go electric on half of its delivery truck purchases by 2025.” And when in doubt, blame Trump:

“This corporate retrenchment has been particularly acute in the US, where the Trump administration has been busy rolling back climate regulations and withdrawing from international treaties such as the Paris Agreement.”

Boo Trump! Yay Paris Agreement! But the problem isn’t that the companies suddenly decided they didn’t care if the Earth burned up, or their customers were burned with them for not being cool and trendy. It’s that they literally couldn’t make this stuff work.

So naturally we’re all going to die:

“It’s a troubling trend for anyone who prefers life on a hospitable planet. We’re currently on pace to add about 3C (5.5F) of warming this century, which is expected to throw the planet into turmoil with diminished food supplies, wiped-out marine life, brutal heat waves and crippling droughts.”

None of which is happening, of course. But investigative journalists don’t investigate opinions they don’t share nowadays. So instead “it could force investors, lawmakers, academics and the broader public to reckon with the fact that voluntary corporate action was never going to stave off climate disaster.” And some guy he does agree with says:

“I am heartened by the alacrity of the retreat and the ferociousness of it, because I think it uncovers the reality that we all need to understand, which is companies aren’t going to save the planet. The quicker that people understand and integrate that, the better.”

So government to the rescue, with its fabled efficiency and honesty.

Speaking of honesty, the piece does get credit for admitting that most of that chatter about how going green would save you money was itself slick misleading PR. Not from companies, from activists. But hey, it’s all in a good cause:

“Some climate-friendly endeavors, including swapping out lightbulbs and putting up solar panels, quickly pay for themselves and enhance the bottom line. But most projects required to achieve deep decarbonization, such as decommissioning coal boilers or using cleaner fuels, cost gobs of money, and no one knows when or if they’ll ever be cheaper than their dirtier alternatives. As long as these measures remain voluntary, they won’t happen at anywhere near the scale or pace that’s needed. And companies will be free to renege on their promises.”

So the state can plunge us into poverty against our wills in the hope that we’ll get back the weather from the Little Ice Age and like it more this time. And companies won’t make money and we won’t have stuff but in that dawn it will be bliss to be alive and to be young will be very heaven or something.