Pirate's Cove

By evolving, US News and World Report mostly means “dumping them”

Corporate Climate Change Pledges Are Shifting and Evolving

Reporting this week that Starbucks has quietly but aggressively rolled back many of its sustainability targets has turned a spotlight on corporate climate pledges and how they have evolved in recent years.

The Financial Times reported Tuesday that Starbucks has revised or abandoned pledges to cut waste and water use in half, even as it reconsiders a goal to reduce carbon emissions by a similar amount.

The newspaper also reported that Starbucks executives focused on sustainability have been particularly hard hit by job cuts at the company over the last two years.

The news was particularly striking because the Seattle-based coffee giant has cultivated an eco-friendly image for years, making green commitments a central element of its corporate identity.

That Starbucks is doing this shows that even the most extreme companies are realizing that it’s a scam, it costs too much money, and the purpose of the business it to make money. Oh, and that people really care about this stuff less and less in the real world, and consumers do not want to pay for the cult activism of companies

The environmental consultancy firm Trellis recently reported that while Walmart cut its overall carbon emissions in 2025, it has also revised overall green commitments, in some cases postponing the target dates for specific goals.

In July, a New York Times analysis cited Pepsi, Coca-Cola and Kraft Heinz along with steel manufacturer ArcelorMittal among corporate giants that “moved the goal posts” when initial climate pledges proved difficult or impossible to honor.

Companies are moving away from placating the climate nuts, because, let’s be honest, while a lot of people care in theory about ‘climate change’, they don’t care that much and companies having pledges means jack squat to them.