zlacker

>>sepias+(OP)
You could start by looking at companies that comprise ESG ETFs. Granted many of the companies included in there could be semineutral or debatable as to actual benefit.

>>giantg+e1
> You could start by looking at companies that comprise ESG ETFs.

You could, if you believe that oil companies deserve a better score than Tesla.

>>bluesc+6k
Tesla has a lot of issues. It's not a stretch to see their material risks (lithium, cobalt, nickel, plastic aka oil) as being pretty bad. The source of the electric powering the car matters too. As does the fact that they still use oil based or CO2 emitting roadways and the effects of the brake pads and tires.

They certainly have problems. Tesla and oil companies have material and process (environmental) risks. Tesla also has the risks associated with poor societal and governance stances.

So back to my original comment - you'll have to look into the companies themselves because their "benefits" are debatable, including Tesla's.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-...

Edit: wow getting a lot of hate without any reply. I guess just because I'm critical of Tesla?

>>giantg+hA
> I guess just because I'm critical of Tesla?

No, it's because the ESG stuff seems more about virtue signaling than doing actual good, and the fact that that one main list includes oil companies but excludes Tesla is really compelling evidence of this.

Other downvotes are probably for stuff like "the fact that they still use oil based or CO2 emitting roadways". I mean... c'mon.

>>dbruec+mH
Relevant Google talk on sloppiness of ESG arguments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6b7K1hjZk4