Unable to load image

WEF Speaker Claims Coffee is Environmentally Destructive :marseycoffeegenocide:

https://valuetainment.com/wef-speaker-claims-coffee-is-environmentally-destructive

During a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland last week, Swiss banker Hubert Keller said coffee production is bad for the environment and is exacerbating climate change.

"The coffee that we all drink emits between 15 and 20 tons of CO2 per ton of coffee," he said. "Every time we drink coffee, we are putting CO2 into the atmosphere."

This assessment came after another WEF speaker described fishing and farming as environmentally destructive activities. The same speaker advocated for destructive activities to be recognized as "ecocide" under new international laws that would punish crimes against nature in the same way genocide is prosecuted. The WEF has also advocated for plant-based diets, the widespread use of electric vehicles, and the introduction of "tiny homes" to replace traditional dwellings.

Keller went on: "And one of the reasons is because most of the coffee plantation or most of the coffee is produced through monoculture and monoculture is also affected by climate change... The quality of these natural assets is deteriorating quite rapidly."

Keller is a managing partner of global wealth management firm Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch, a bank deeply committed to Environmental, Social, and corporate Governenace (ESG) philosophy. But he is not the first person at the WEF to attribute climate change to coffee.

In 2016, the WEF put out a blog post about the deleterious environmental effects of coffee cups, single-serve coffee pods, and other things related to coffee consumption. "Is your coffee addiction destroying the planet?" the WEF asked.

Watch Keller's statement below:

17
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm really curious to see the inner workings of a troll sometimes. The folks who painted the street did nothing wrong but you're coming in here trying to distract and call them out or delegitimize them somehow. Why? I think you're just trying to distract: BLM did something not illegal and might “look good” in this situation and folks like you can't let that be. Gotta detract or make it seem bad somehow. Am I close? If not, why join in with what you said, given it wasn't relevant to the article at all.

Snapshots:

said coffee production is bad for the environment:

WEF speaker described fishing and farming:

plant-based diets:

electric vehicles:

introduction of "tiny homes":

a managing partner:

a bank deeply committed to:

put out a blog post:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.