Think about the issue non-renewable sources of energy vrs renewable energy or dirty economy vrs clean economy, the decision to go green markets or to avoid going green markets affects positively or negatively in the short and long term the dynamics producers vrs consumers.
Hence, each decision has consequences, which raises the question: Who are the winners and losers so far from 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance?
What do you think?
Please share your own views
Winners:
1. Companies investing in renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and geothermal: These companies are benefitting from government incentives and subsidies and from consumer demand for green energy.
2. Companies investing in energy efficiency technologies: Companies that offer energy efficiency solutions such as LED lighting, smart meters, and energy management systems are also benefitting from the shift away from traditional energy sources.
3. Consumers: Consumers are saving money on their energy bills and reducing their environmental impact by using more energy-efficient products and investing in renewable energy.
Losers:
1. Companies relying on traditional, non-renewable energy sources: Companies that rely on traditional sources such as coal, oil, and gas are losing out on potential revenues as more people turn to renewable energy sources.
2. Utilities: Utilities are facing the challenge of maintaining their existing infrastructure while also investing in new renewable energy sources. They are also facing regulatory pressure to reduce emissions and increase the use of renewable energy.
3. Polluters: Companies that have been releasing harmful pollutants into the environment are facing increased scrutiny and regulation, making it more difficult to continue polluting.
Good day Peter, thank you for commenting.
You need to take a more careful look at the question, In 2012 Rio + 20 we were supposed to shift from traditional perfect market thinking to perfect green market thinking, that shift has WINNERS AND LOSSERS. If you avoid the paradigm shift to perfect green markets, and you go as the world did and you go the way of dwarf green markets, then the winners before become losers and the losers before become winners.
If you understand who benefits and who loses from going environmental pollution reduction markets or perfect green markets and away from the DIRTY economy, then you can see that the losers becomes winners and the winners become losers when you go paradigm shift avoidance.....
The question is based on the winners and losers under green market paradigm shift avoidance, can you please rethink your list of winners and losers...?. For example, under green market paradigm shift avoidance the development of renewable energy technology is not a priority environmental pollution management is, meaning the dirty economy is here to stay.....Under green markets, the closing of the renewable energy technology gap to transition from the dirty to the clean economy is a priority so as to be able to produce green goods and services at the lowest green market cost possible reducing environmental pollution in the process....
Take a good at your list and see if you can place them better in the green market paradigm shift avoidance world...!
Respectfully yours;
Lucio
Yes, I can certainly rethink my list of winners and losers in a green market paradigm shift avoidance world.
Winners: -Fossil fuel companies, as they can continue with their business-as-usual practices without facing the pressure of transitioning to cleaner and more renewable energy sources.
-Companies that are able to produce and sell goods and services at a lower cost, as they won't be required to invest in more expensive green technology.
-Industries that rely heavily on fossil fuels, such as the automotive and airline industries, as they can continue to operate without having to invest in more expensive green technology.
Losers: -Environmentalists and activists, as their efforts to push for a shift to green markets will not be successful.
-Companies that produce renewable energy technology, as they will not be able to benefit from the increased demand for their products.
-Consumers, as they will not be able to take advantage of the lower prices that green markets can provide.
Dear Peter, good day. Yes, that is the general list of winners and losers of 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance. If they would have gone green markets in 2012, the winners in the general list become losers and the losers become winners.
Now in specific terms, the ones you benefit the most from green market paradigm shift avoidance since 2012 are the owners of fossil fuels resources as their value increased through time as the countries consuming fossil fuels and fossil fuel products were expanding the cheap DIRTY ECONOMY under environmental pollution management during what they thought was a long term PEACE TIMES.....to levels of extreme dependency on fossil fuel resources.
The Ukraine-Russia war shows that going green market paradigm shift avoidance in 2012 has backfired BIG TIME as it came when the world, SPECIALLY EUROPE became even more dependent on fossil fuels since then and it did not focused its attention on closing the renewable energy technology gap they had then as there was no plan to ever transition to the clean economy as the plan was to continue polluting under the banner of environmental pollution management....
In summary, breaking fossil fuel dependency now has become costlier that it would have been if the world had transition away from the dirty economy since 2012 devaluating the value of non-renewable resources in the process/develuating the value of the pollution based wealth of owners of non-renewable resources.....and what it is worse, they, Europe and the rest of the world, are trying not to move to start a transition away from the dirty economy and towards the clean economy formally and with a clear plan, but they are focused right now on substituting polluting resources suppliers from unfriendly ones to friendly ones to continue their business under environmental pollution management for the foreseeable future.
Thank you Peter for commenting!
Respectfully yours;
Lucio