Photo credit: Liam Coyne

In an interview with an SAP executive this week, she earnestly suggested that consumers should be kissing corporations' asses online whenever they claim they'll do something to lower their massive environmental impacts by some date in the future, despite a longstanding history of contributing to the problem.

And I've got to tell you, hearing stuff like this really bums me out.

"Imagine if [Coca-Cola] could tell you that 'it's going to take us 10 years. And in two years, we can do it in this region. And in two more years, we can do it in this region. And you could agree or disagree. You could post it on social media, whether you agree or not," she said in an interview with SDxCentral.

This imaginary utopia she describes, apparently fueled in part by SAP's "customer-centric green experiences" portfolio, is something I'd argue already exists. Anyone can “@” their least favorite corporation on Twitter and tell it exactly how they think it's doing on climate issues.  

But her next comments were what really made me sigh.

"You could become a great promoter of them to say, 'hey, Coca-Cola, I really believe in your journey to get to all recycled water bottles, and thank you for telling me that you're gonna get there soon. And I can't wait to go buy that water bottle in New York City that's made out of 100% recyclable post-consumable products next year,'" she suggested.

This kind of language isn't surprising to hear from a corporate sustainability executive at a company who does business with massive oil giants, but it's still disappointing.

And I believe that I, as a consumer, still have a right to be angry with large-scale emitters like Coca-Cola and oil and gas giants for getting us into this whole mess. Since when does the bare minimum deserve thanks?

While there are undoubtedly merits to involving customers in large-scale decisions that determine the scale of their environmental impact, and these SAP services will probably prove beneficial at some scale, this follows the corporate sustainability trend of snagging the low-hanging fruit, shifting the blame to the wrong parties, and patting themselves on the back.

The other misconception I observed in our conversation was an expected sense of consumer complacency and patience as large-scale emitters struggle to figure out how to profit from sustainability.

"We have to be patient a little bit in the business transformation side of it, too," she said.

With unprecedented heat waves sweeping the globe as further evidence climate change is affecting us literally right now, should consumers really just … be patient? Instead, why aren't we thinking about how those transformations can go faster? 

To me, the answer's simple. It just isn't fun for corporations to think about the most impactful ways to lower global emissions because too much money is on the table.

If the oil and gas companies really wanted to do something about their involvement in climate change they would do more than pursue alternative aviation fuel or carbon capture and storage on the side. 

Based on her work "with some of the largest plastic producers and oil and gas companies," the SAP executive said most of those emitters would "be open to" pursuing those business-as-usual with sustainability-on-the-side pathways like carbon capture, but that isn't too convincing of oil giants' enthusiasm to embark on these "transformations."

At the end of the day, "these are big budgets and big conglomerates, and it takes a little bit of time for them to get there. So I don't think it's 'we don't want to do it.' I think it's 'we need more time,'" she said.

I reiterate: do we really have time to wait for oil and gas producers to figure out how to make a profit from something other than ruining the planet?

Seems to be more like "we don't want to do it right now. Ask again in a few years, but the answer will still probably be the same."

Instead of fluffing up the largest emitters and selling them small, easy ways to look more sustainable, companies like SAP should focus resources on developing solutions that move the needle as fast as possible. Or at the very least they shouldn't support the worst emitters in their quest to look not quite as destructive as they are.

And there's a hard fact many are still unwilling to accept: if something constructive is actually going to be done about the climate crisis, not all existing industries will turn a profit. 

But hey, the joke's on them. Without society-as-usual – in the event of large-scale climate impacts like extreme weather, for example – business-as-usual doesn't stand much of a chance. 

But it seems like too many politicians and corporations make money from ignoring climate change behind the curtain, and as long as that stays the same, meaningful large-scale climate action remains as elusive as some of these corporate sustainability goals.