The Corporate Case for a Climate Deal

Three days before he jets off for Copenhagen, President Obama received a letter signed by 40 major corporations that urged him to come home with “a robust international agreement” to address climate change.

“This agreement has to include significant near- and long-term emissions-reductions targets and strong finance provisions, with a substantial commitment of new long-term finance from developed nations, including the United States,” the letter stated.

Signers of the letter included Duke Energy, Microsoft, Nike, PG&E, and Starbucks, all of whom are well-known for their support of caps on carbon emissions. But commercial real estate giant Jones Lang LaSalle also signed the letter, as did Lykes Brothers Inc., a Tampa-based agricultural company.

The letter is the latest sign of a split in the business community over climate change. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposed House legislation that capped carbon emissions, prompting Nike to quit its board and PG&E to drop its membership.

But if an international agreement is reached at Copenhagen to reduce carbon emissions globally, that would address one of the Chamber’s objections: that U.S. action alone wouldn’t solve the problem of global warming, but would hurt America’s economic competitiveness.

Meanwhile, a new Associated Press-Stanford University poll found that nearly half of all Americans think addressing global warming would help the U.S. economy. Only one third think it would hurt the economy.

The results aren’t so favorable if a cap-and-trade system raises energy prices. Nearly 60 percent said they would oppose cap-and-trade if it meant paying an extra $10 a month for electricity.

Yes, Americans are environmentalists, but they’re still consumers first.