Billionaire's private jet angst won't save the world
Mike Cannon-Brookes — co-founder and chief executive officer of enterprise software business Atlassian and Australia's fifth-richest person with a $13.2 billion fortune — is suffering a "deep internal conflict' about taking on the trappings of the billionaire lifestyle.
In a posting on LinkedIn recently, he poured out his heart about reconciling his convictions as a climate activist with his actions as a tech boss — in particular, Atlassian's decision to sponsor a Formula One team and his purchase of a Bombardier 7500 private jet.
"There's a couple of reasons I've purchased a plane,' he sighed. "Personal security is the primary reason (an unfortunate reality of my world), but also so I can run a global business from Australia and still be a constantly present dad.'
As a fellow fortysomething Australian dad, I can sympathize a bit. I'd like to reduce my carbon footprint by getting my own electric car, instead of the battered 2008 Toyota Prius I share with my ex-wife. But money doesn't grow on trees and we all have to make climate compromises somewhere.
The range of choices available to us, however, is governed by the institutional setup we live in. Cannon-Brookes could reduce his carbon footprint by moving away from the isolated southern hemisphere country where Atlassian earns only 11% of its revenue. I could cut back on Uber Eats to afford the payments on an electric car lease. In each case, though, technology and regulations make the polluting option a no-brainer.
That's not meant to be just snark. One of the most profound problems in the energy transition is that carbon pollution is more or less free. Even places like Europe which have been trading emission permits for two decades mostly levy them only on major facilities like power stations. That means it's easy for the rest of us to choose the carbon-intensive option.
The most substantive of these choices is not what Cannon-Brookes is doing with his plane, but with his business. Right now, the most important aspect of this is artificial intelligence.
Atlassian sells software products such as Jira and Trello, which help businesses run their operations more effectively. Revenues largely depend on the number of white-collar professionals signed up and they're threatened by the possibility that many of those clients are going to be automated out of their jobs in the years ahead. As a result, Atlassian is trying to persuade customers that its own cloud-based technologies and AI can make it more useful to them than ever.
The carbon cost of this is significant. Data center emissions in the U.S. already rival those of the domestic airline industry and are growing far quicker. Atlassian's pollution from "purchased goods and services' — mostly data centers — has increased 77% in the past two fiscal years as it has embraced the inevitability of AI, along with the rest of the tech sector. This now amounts to about two-thirds of its rapidly expanding footprint — well ahead of the 22% from every business trip taken by its 12,000-odd employees, not to mention the sliver one private jet would represent.
Put a reasonable price on all that carbon and any money being made disappears. Gross profits over the six years Atlassian has reported comprehensive emissions have amounted to 19 cents per metric ton of its total footprint, compared to an average $52 per ton for European carbon permits over the period. The company's main strategy for fixing this is encouraging its suppliers to set credible net-zero targets, but just 12.3% had done so last June.
The comforting response to this is to accuse do-gooder private-jet fliers such as Cannon-Brookes and Taylor Swift of hypocrisy. The tougher realization is that not doing enough is always the easy option. We're all victims of temptation when it comes to climate pollution, though the consequences of that are vastly larger when you have immense personal wealth to deploy.
Cannon-Brookes is a rare billionaire who has actually put money where his mouth is on climate, whether it's buying a 10% stake in generator AGL Energy to push a faster closure of coal plants or funding a quixotic plan to export renewable electricity from Australia to Singapore. That's a far better record than the U.S. moguls who cut funding for climate initiatives and ingratiated themselves with President Donald Trump as soon as net zero fell from fashion.
The problem isn't that the rich are hypocrites — it's that they're powerful. Zeroing out emissions may force us all to make choices we'd rather not make. That's likely to hurt even the most conscience-plagued billionaires, and in most societies, they'll have an outsized ability to block needed political change.
It's up to ordinary voters to ensure the complaints of a handful of moguls don't limit the scope of what we'll do to halt climate change. The modern liberal-democratic society we've built, bolstered by a stable environment, is a precious one. If we don't want it to perish from the earth, we need an alternative to a government of billionaires, by billionaires, for billionaires.
David Fickling is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change and energy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yomiuri Shimbun
2 days ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Govt, LDP Discuss Increasing Taxation on Foreign Visitors; Abolition of Tourist's Consumption Tax Exemption Urged
Yomiuri Shimbun file photo The Liberal Democratic Party's headquarters in Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo. There are growing discussions within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party about how to tax the rapidly increasing number of foreign visitors to Japan more effectively. The LDP argues that abolishing the consumption tax exemption and raising the International Tourist Tax (departure tax) would also help to combat overtourism. A group of LDP lawmakers on Thursday handed proposals to Itsunori Onodera, chairperson of the LDP's Policy Research Council, and Yoichi Miyazawa, chairperson of the party's Research Commission on the Tax System, calling for the abolition of the consumption tax exemption. Introduced alongside Japan's consumption tax in 1989, the exemption is based on the international principle that consumption tax is levied at the point of consumption. However, there have recently been an increasing number of cases of abuse of the system, with large quantities of tax-exempt goods being purchased and resold for profit. In response, the government plans to revise the current system of selling goods without consumption tax being imposed at duty-free shops and instead implement a 'refund system' from November next year, whereby consumers will receive the amount paid in consumption tax at the time of departure. If abuse occurs, the refund will not be paid. Nevertheless, the lawmakers argue that abuse cannot be prevented if duty-free shops and international visitors collude, and therefore the tax exemption should be abolished. 'Offering a 10% discount (by not imposing the consumption tax) to encourage people to buy overseas brand-name goods (in Japan) is not the vision of a tourism-oriented country that we are aiming for,' said Kenji Nakanishi, a member of the House of Representatives. The government and the LDP are also considering increasing the departure tax. Introduced in 2019 as a source of revenue for tourism promotion, the tax imposes a ¥1,000 levy on passengers departing from Japan, regardless of nationality. The tax is added to airline and cruise ship ticket prices. At the House of Councillors Budget Committee in May, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba stated that visitors to Japan also use Japan's infrastructure and that 'paying appropriate compensation is an obligation that they owe Japanese taxpayers,' indicating his intention to consider raising the tax. There are countries and regions with higher departure taxes than Japan — Australia imposes a 70 Australian dollar (approximately ¥6,600) levy, while Hong Kong charges 120 Hong Kong dollars (approximately ¥2,200). According to the Japan National Tourism Organization, the number of foreign visitors to Japan in 2024 increased by 47.1% year-on-year to reach 36.87 million. Visitors are arriving at a record-breaking pace this year, making measures to address overtourism an urgent issue.
Nikkei Asia
3 days ago
- Nikkei Asia
Australian counter-drone maker rises as UAV warfare rapidly evolves
SYDNEY -- Two years ago, Australia's DroneShield, which builds equipment to detect and disable drones, had about 90 employees. Today, that number has jumped to 275. Its growth from a start-up founded in 2014 to an ASX-listed company with a market cap of 1.3 billion Australian dollars ($848 million) reflects how drones have reshaped modern conflict and propelled increasing demand for counter measures.
Japan Today
4 days ago
- Japan Today
Trump administration reviewing Biden-era submarine pact with Australia, UK
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a swearing-in ceremony of Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 6, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura/File Photo By Phil Stewart, Idrees Ali and David Brunnstrom U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has launched a formal review of a defense pact worth hundreds of billions of dollars that former President Joe Biden made with Australia and the United Kingdom, allowing Australia to acquire conventionally armed nuclear submarines, a U.S. defense official told Reuters. The formal Pentagon-led review is likely to alarm Australia, which sees the submarines as critical to its own defense as tensions grow over China's expansive military buildup. It could also throw a wrench in Britain's defense planning. AUKUS is at the center of a planned expansion of its submarine fleet. "We are reviewing AUKUS as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda," the official said of the review, which was first reported by Financial Times. "Any changes to the administration's approach for AUKUS will be communicated through official channels, when appropriate." AUKUS, formed in 2021 to address shared worries about China's growing power, is designed to allow Australia to acquire nuclear-powered attack submarines and other advanced weapons such as hypersonic missiles. Vocal skeptics of the AUKUS deal among Trump's senior policy officials include Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy advisor. In a 2024 talk with Britain's Policy Exchange think-tank, Colby cautioned that U.S. military submarines were a scarce, critical commodity, and that U.S. industry could not produce enough of them to meet American demand. They would also be central to U.S. military strategy in any confrontation with China centered in the First Island Chain, an area that runs from Japan through Taiwan, the Philippines and on to Borneo, enclosing China's coastal seas. "CROWN JEWEL" "My concern is why are we giving away this crown jewel asset when we most need it," Colby said. The Australian and UK embassies in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The U.S. National Security Council also did not immediately respond to a request for comment. AUKUS is Australia's biggest-ever defense project, with Canberra committing to spend A$368 billion ($240 billion) over three decades on the program, which includes billions of dollars of investment in the U.S. production base. News of the U.S. review comes hours after the British government announced plans to invest billions of pounds to upgrade its submarine industrial base, including at BAE Systems in Barrow and Rolls-Royce Submarines in Derby, to allow the increase in submarine production rate announced in Britain's Strategic Defence Review. Britain said this month it would build up to 12 next-generation attack submarines of the model intended to be jointly developed by the UK, U.S. and Australia under AUKUS. Only six countries operate nuclear submarines: the U.S., the UK, Russia, China, France and India. AUKUS would add Australia to that club starting in 2032 with the U.S. sale of Virginia-class submarines. Before that, the U.S. and Britain would start forward rotations of their submarines in 2027 out of an Australian naval base in Western Australia. Later, Britain and Australia would design and build a new class of submarines, with U.S. assistance, with the first delivery to the UK in the late 2030s and to Australia in the early 2040s. Although Australia has declined to say ahead of time whether it would send the submarines to join U.S. forces in any conflict between the U.S. and China, Colby noted Australia's historic alliance with Washington, including sending troops to Vietnam. "I think we can make a decent bet that Australia would be there with us in the event of a conflict," Colby said last year. Speaking in Congress on Tuesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said "we're having honest conversations with our allies." On Australia, Hegseth said: "We want to make sure those capabilities are part of how they use them with their submarines, but also how they integrate with us as allies." Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who signed a previous agreement to acquire French submarines that was shelved in favor of AUKUS, told CNBC last week it was "more likely than not that Australia will not end up with any submarines at all, but instead, simply provide a large base in Western Australia for the American Navy and maintenance facilities there." © Thomson Reuters 2025.
