This morning I had a good laugh after reading this:
Truck maker Volvo has announced that it will cease buying Swedish nuclear power at the end of this year. Volvo has signed a deal with Vattenfall ensuring that it does not receive energy from nuclear power sources, which it said did not sit well with the company's environmental goals.Environmental goals, huh? Are they not an auto company whose products consume fossil fuels which create emissions? Last I heard, trucks, buses and cars still emit CO2 during operation even if they burn biofuels. Seems to me they should be concerned more with their products and less with where their electricity comes from. Especially when you see below where
Here’s their webpage on environmental commitment:
We constantly strive to improve energy efficiency in our own operations. And we currently plan for CO2 emission free production in all of our plants.More on a different page:
The main approach is to gradually switch to wind power and biofuel as the energy sources for electricity and heating. Before the end of year 2007, all three plants will have reduced their CO2 emissions to as close to zero as technically possible.Hmm. Volvo’s goal is to be CO2 emission free yet they will use biofuels for electricity and heating. Do they not know that biomass energy consumption will boost CO2 emissions? It hardly makes sense to take a CO2 reducer and turn it into a CO2 emitter.
Here’s the kick I get out of this. Only 3.4% of Sweden’s electricity actually came from fossil fuels in 2004. Where did the rest of
Emissions from the electric sector to power Volvo’s factories are about as low as they can get. What’s up with this big campaign then to reduce their emissions? This sums it up the best:
Trade Union IF Metall was unimpressed by Volvo Trucks' anti-nuclear stance.A PR stunt is right. Apparently they need to become a little more educated on the effects of Sweden’s nuclear phase-out.
"It sounds like Volvo is using environmental profiling as a PR stunt," spokesman Per Öhman told Dagens Nyheter.