I've begun reading his "Collapse" with an eye toward writing a kind of
running commentary as I progress through this 560 page book.

Something that I had premonitions about, based on previous encounters with
Diamond, is painfully obvious as I make my way through his chapter on
Montana. This is a state that I have visited, as well as Alberta to the
North, a province that shares many of Montana's ecological problems.
Basically, Diamond tends to compartmentalize. In other words, he examines
Montana's problems as a challenge to the state of Montana--as if you could
build ecologically sustainable societies within the border of a single state.

For example, rather than obsessing about the environmental consequences of
wheat farming, as he does, Diamond might consider just returning Montana to
the status quo ante when Bison and other native flora and fauna as part of
a general transformation of the Plains states. This seems beyond him.

He also has trouble thinking outside of the box on economic questions. For
example, he is virtually tormented by the idea that the big mining
companies will go out of business if they are forced to clean up after
themselves. How else do we expect such companies to behave, he seems to
plead with himself. They *have* to make profits.

This brings me to a connected point. I didn't know that Diamond has been
the Director of World Wildlife Fund/USA since 1993. Here are some of the
other members of the board of directors:

David Bonderman
Principal, General Partner, and Founder
Texas Pacific Group
Fort Worth, Tex.

Pamela Daley
Vice President, Corporate Business Development
General Electric
Fairfield, Conn.

Brenda S. Davis
Vice President, Technical Resources
Johnson & Johnson
New Brunswick, N.J.

Lawrence H. Linden*
Advisory Director
Goldman Sachs
New York, N.Y.

Peter Nadosy*
Advisory Director
Morgan Stanley Asset Management
New York, N.Y.

Stephen M. Wolf
Former Chairman
US Airways, Inc.
Arlington, Va.

This might explain his rather startling comments about oil companies in a
salon.com interview:

Q: Is there an environmental award that is given to businesses that do
well? Is Home Depot being recognized for what it's done?

A: They're recognized within the World Wildlife Fund, on whose board I sit.
I don't know if the general public has an appreciation for what Home Depot
is doing. The general public certainly does not have wide sympathy for what
the oil companies are doing. And partly that's the result of history. And
there still are oil spills; there's been a bad oil spill within the last
two weeks. But you have to read the newspaper carefully. That oil spill was
not a tanker belonging to ChevronTexaco or ExxonMobil; it was a tanker
belonging to a private oil carrier, and it's the private carriers that are
still using the single-hull tankers and are adhering to low standards. So
they give the oil industry a bad name. I'm not saying that the oil industry
is a saint; there are still big problems with oil industries operating in
dictatorial countries, but the public should also understand the very high
standards to which some oil companies are adhering.

Q: Like Chevron.

A: Like Chevron in Papua New Guinea. Now I can't swear that Chevron is
being clean everywhere in the world, but I've talked with lots of Chevron
employees who told me about how Chevron operates, for example, in Bahrain
and Dubai and Kuwait, and it sounds, from what I'm told, that their
standards there are as high as their standards in Papua New Guinea.

full:
http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2005/01/08/jared_diamond/index1.html

Here's a take on the relationship between Chevron and WWF. It would appear
that it would not be an overstatement to describe it as sordid:

The poor environmental reputation of the oil industry and the environmental
significance of the area caused Chevron to take precautions. Will Frazier,
former project director for environment, health and safety said in 1992,
"We've tried to make this a model effort for development that is
environmentally sound and socially responsible." The Kutubu development has
indeed been billed a "green oil project" in several industry magazines by
virtue of a pipeline that does not leak and the employment of professional
environmentalists from the United States to work with the oil joint
venture. The World Wildlife Fund-USA is party to a $3 million contract with
Chevron to implement an "Integrated Conservation and Development Project"
for the oil project area.

While the environmental merits of the WWF plan are open to debate, it is
indisputable that Chevron values its ties with WWF for the credibility they
lend to an environmentally questionable operation. A leaked 1993
confidential evaluation of the potential impacts of a Kutubu oil spill and
the clean-up capacity of the joint venture, written after a practice
exercise conducted by the joint-venture partners, expressed concern "as to
whether a policy exists to control media and interest groups (Greenpeace)
at Kopi area should a spill of this magnitude occur." Other documents
concluded that the joint venture partners could rest easy, however, because
"WWF will act as a buffer for the joint venture against environmentally
damaging activities in the region, and against international environmental
criticism."

full: http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/motherlode/chevron/png.html


Louis Proyect Marxism list: www.marxmail.org

Reply via email to