Partnering to Adress Climate Change

According to the article, “Partnering to Address Climate Change,” by Ruben Aronin, Starbucks became sponsor of Global Green USA in April, 2005. Some famous actors joined this group, trying to reduce greenhouse gas. The amount Starbucks is paying will total $150,000, and will be used to educate people about climate change. Global Green USA’s agenda includes construction assistance for New Orleans and new buildings to make them not use much energy, transporting actors in hybrid vehicles, and doing research in Antarctica. Global Green USA has two other tasks besides global warming, which are eliminating nuclear weapons and protecting clean water. Starbucks and Global Green organization say “Go green,” but they are not doing enough.

Starbucks’ action is good, but they should pay more money. I’m glad to hear about Starbucks trying to “Go green,” because I drink coffee almost every day from there. However, I don’t know how much money they earn a year but they should pay more, because they charge almost five dollars per cup of coffee. It is pretty expensive, I think. Also, Starbucks is one of the most famous coffee shops in the world, so they have to lead other companies to “Go green.”

Starbucks should do something else besides paying money. I didn’t know Starbucks was going green until I read the article. Starbucks is spread all over the world, so if they try going green with each shop, it will have a huge effect. Organizations want people to become aware of global warming by spending huge amounts of money. However, they don’t need to do that if companies like Starbucks donate.

Global Green’s idea to drive celebrities to the Oscars with hybrid cars is not a solution. I was surprised at the idea of Global Green. Hybrid cars are good for the environment, but I don’t know why they’re only being used for the Oscars. It doesn’t make sense if everyone, not just celebrities, isn’t using hybrid cars. This action is good for advertisement, but not for helping ordinary people to switch to hybrid cars.

In conclusion, there are three improvements, which are that Starbucks should pay more money, Starbucks has to “go green” more actively, and Global Green should be concerned about how to spend money. Starbucks makes lots of money every day, so they can pay more to protect the environment. Starbucks has branches all over the world; they can teach about global warming to people all over the world. Finally, Global Green has to think about helping ordinary people to switch to hybrid cars; therefore, they should reconsider how to spend money.

Aronin, R. (2006). Partnering to Address Climate Change. Social Responsibility Newsletter. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from http://www.starbucks.com/csrnewsletter/winter06/csrNGO.asp