Environmentalists had their dander up yet again a few weeks ago when ExxonMobil voted down resolutions on renewable energy and global warming at a recent shareholders meeting. Why are they surprised? This is, after all, the company that tried to bring back to Alaska waters its famous tanker, the Valdez. Yes, that tanker. Not exactly the model of a modern, empathetic company.

ExxonMobil’s chairman Lee Raymond “predicted” that “even with rapid growth, wind and solar power would account for less than 1% of world energy by 2020,” according to an AP article by David Koenig. A fossilized reaction from this dinosaur in a dinosaur industry.

By rejecting these resolutions, ExxonMobil is positioning itself to reap the rewards of a self-fulfilling prophecy. They will continue to rely heavily on diminishing non-renewable resources until they are buried by their competitors such as BP (“Beyond Petroleum”) and ChevronTexaco, whose own shareholders recently called for significant measures on renewable investments, and Shell. When the sun sets on ExxonMobil, don’t expect too many tears from the environmental community or corporate social responsibility investors.

So, ExxonMobil doesn’t “get it” and may never. Yet the larger implications of this recent news are perhaps more serious. Institutional investors bought into the company's game plan in a major way, swayed by the chairman’s position. The extreme greenies are after the wrong gang.

How many mutual funds or pension plans in your portfolio are invested in short-sighted companies like ExxonMobil? And why? How can you get them to stop until those companies adopt greener policies? And will it really make a difference?

The shareholders rule. And until we can change the minds of investors, especially large institutional investors, and analysts and others in the investment community, companies like EM can run roughshod over a cleaner, greener future. It behooves the CSR and socially responsible investing community to apply pressure and create incentives to change the conversation in the marketplace.

This is already happening in the U.K. and in Europe. The U.S. is lagging behind, but how much would it take to drive the herd a little bit closer to such greener pastures? Especially if there’s money in it. Green and greed are not mutually exclusive; neither are ecological health and economic prosperity.

Steven Lydenberg of Domini Social Investments put out a self-fulfilling prophecy of his own a short time ago. His vision for Socially Responsible Investing, subtitled a “Model of 2006,” makes recommendations that could have a wide-ranging impact on the marketplace and perhaps even Wall Street itself.

Lydenberg makes three suggestions for responsible business owners:

• Adopt comprehensive voting policies on social, environmental, and corporate governance issues, including guidelines for voting and disclosure of votes;
• State publicly the extent to which they incorporate social and environmental issues in their investment practices;
• Undertake ongoing dialogue among themselves on social, and environmental issues, as they do on corporate governance now.

He also recommends training analysts to “routinely incorporate CSR considerations into securities analysis for stocks and bonds.” This would supplement traditional financial analyses by focusing on the value added to companies or the risk to which they are exposed by failing to address specific social and environmental concerns.

This is an intriguing notion. What would Wall Street look like if a majority or even a large, vocal minority of its analysts included such screens for environmental risk, positions on global warming, ecological footprints, and social issues?

Imagine what economic drivers could be developed in such a climate. Companies competing with each other to reduce energy consumption or reliance on non-renewable sources -- developing new technologies to create a new infrastructure or improving existing renewable energy technologies. (As I write this, I’ve learned about a Pennsylvania-based company that is developing a new turbine technology that will improve wind power efficiency and effectiveness.)

Imagine the market itself driving the herd to greener pastures. What kind of impact could that have on the economy? New companies and new investments. Sounds like a New Economy, call it the New Green Economy. And let’s make it sustainable -- not another bubble.

------
Scott Edward Anderson is an award-winning poet and a director of philanthropy with The Nature Conservancy.