Starbucks jet-setting CEO

I’m all for saving the planet, whatever that means. I know what it doesn’t mean. Forcing me to drive an electric vehicle or decreasing even more the amount of water in our washing machine and toilet bowl.

Over the years, since the “Saving the Planet” mantra kicked off in the 1980s, I’ve watched with disdain all the hypocrites who so often serve as the face of the movement.

Guys like Al Gore, former veep to Bill Clinton, the last president who gave us a balanced budget, who wrote a book, “Earth in the Balance,” published in 1992, which focused on climate change.

Even the book’s description is hard to decipher: “(The book) argues that the engine of human progress now threatens to destroy the Earth unless humans can create a more ‘sustainable’ solution from within the framework of society.”

What does that even mean? Cold fusion?

Big Electric Bills

For me, the real reason behind climate change is related to population growth. With a world population that ballooned from approximately 2 billion in 1900 to approximately 8 billion in 2000, what more do we need to know?

Poor Planet Earth can only sustain so many people, and apparently, we’ve reached that limit, as the world’s population continues to grow, even if it is at a slower rate than it did during the preceding century.

Meanwhile, guys like Gore and Hollywood heavyweights Leonardo DiCaprio and Gorgeous George Clooney et. al get all the kudos for their work as “climate activists” while leaving behind a carbon footprint the size of two NFL teams on game day, including the fans in the stands.

For example, when word came out in the 1990s that Al was living in a house far larger than your average home, the Associated Press did some research and published a story that reported the Gores’ energy bills (prior to his divorce from Tipper in 2010) showed consumption of 191,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006 vs. the typical Nashville home (15,600 kilowatt-hours) for the same time period.

This is what you call “saving energy,” or “saving the planet.”

Meanwhile, guys like Leonardo fly to Europe to accept an award for his work in saving the planet, using a G-V to make the trip, which uses a lot more jet fuel than an airliner, but few make mention of the hypocrisy.

Then he flies back home to his Hollywood mansion where he consumes some more kilowatts.

These so-called “greenies,” most of them, are in reality, hypocrites.

Starbucks’ Fiasco

Now comes news about Starbucks’ new CEO, courtesy of a story published last week by The Telegraph, which carried this headline: “Jet-setting Starbucks boss makes a mockery of the company’s green claptrap.”

I have to be careful taking too big of a dig at Starbucks because local cities love the company. Whenever a Valley city or town lands one, everyone is happy, including the man or woman who just downed the Double Chocolatey Chip Frappuccino, which contains 450 calories and a whopping 48 grams of sugar. (Source: The Telegraph.)

By the way, the American Heart Association recommends that men consume no more than 36 grams of added sugar per day; women, no more than 25 grams.

So with just one Chip Frap, you’ve almost doubled your daily sugar consumption as you inch closer to the cardiologist.

Time for a donut, too.

If you would have told me 20 years ago that one day, people would be paying $5 and more for a cup of coffee, I would have called them nuts. Not to their face, but certainly behind their back — “That guy is nuts.”

I knew it was bad when I couldn’t even figure out what size cups Starbucks was offering.

Instead of small, medium, large, and extra-large, we suddenly had this added to our lexicon: “Tall” which is really the smallest SB cup offered, at 12 ounces; “Grande,” which is 16 ounces; “Venti,” which clocks in at 20 ounces; and “”Trenta,” which offers you 30 ounces of the high-priced coffee that used to cost a buck.

Whenever I got a Starbucks, I just went with, “Give me a medium.”

Then, when I checked out, Starbucks has the gall to have the tip amount right there where it’s going to be seen even before you put in your credit card.

A tip? For a person working the counter?

Nuts, I know. The counter people at the other fast-food joints don’t get a tip, but they’re not as “hip” as Starbucks, or so we’re led to believe.

Personally, I never tip them, just so I can gauge the dirty look I get in return, like I’m some sort of cheapskate. If they were waiting a table, fine, a tip is in order; but for working a counter?

Hey, I’m already paying $3.65 or more for a stupid 16-ounce cup of coffee, even if it is straight black, with no frills.

Here’s the “greenie” kicker, though: Starbucks’ newest CEO, Brian Niccol, 50, who got hired this year after being credited for turning around the Chipotle Mexican Grill chain (stock price increased approximately eight times during his tenure; more revenue; higher profits, etc.) is going to commute to work three times a week via a private jet.

Probably aboard one of the company’s two Gulfstream G550s, which burn, on average, 438 gallons per hour.

Saving the Planet.

Apparently, according to The Telegraph story, Niccol’s wife didn’t want to uproot the kids from their Newport Beach, Calif. school to Starbuck’s home base in Seattle.

So, the new CEO will fly there at least three times a week, working off an annual salary of $113 million, which is four times what his predecessor was making.

By the way, on Starbucks’ home page, the company lists its “global impact” report, which encompasses 66 pages of “word salad,” such as this nifty little message from the CEO who just booted from his job to make room for Niccol:

“…when Starbucks is at its best, it will bridge to a better future for our partners; uplift the everyday for our customers; help ensure the future of coffee for all for our farmers; contribute positively to each of our communities; and finally, give more than we take from the environment.”

Yeah, but what about all that jet fuel being consumed?